4–4–02 Thursday Vol. 67 No. 65 April 4, 2002 Pages 16011–16284
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:18 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\04APWS.LOC pfrm07 PsN: 04APWS
1 II Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002
The FEDERAL REGISTER is published daily, Monday through SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Friday, except official holidays, by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, PUBLIC Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. Subscriptions: Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Committee of Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Superintendent of Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official edition. General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 Single copies/back copies: The Federal Register provides a uniform system for making available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general (Toll-Free) applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published FEDERAL AGENCIES by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Subscriptions: Paper or fiche 202–523–5243 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 202–523–5243 issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents currently on file for public inspection, see http://www.nara.gov/ fedreg. What’s NEW! The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication Federal Register Table of Contents via e-mail established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, Subscribe to FEDREGTOC, to receive the Federal Register Table of the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. Contents in your e-mail every day. The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. It is also available online at no charge as one of the databases If you get the HTML version, you can click directly to any document on GPO Access, a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office. in the issue. The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the To subscribe, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select: authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register Online mailing list archives as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6 a.m. each FEDREGTOC-L day the Federal Register is published and it includes both text Join or leave the list and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. Then follow the instructions. GPO Access users can choose to retrieve online Federal Register documents as TEXT (ASCII text, graphics omitted), PDF (Adobe Portable Document Format, including full text and all graphics), or SUMMARY (abbreviated text) files. Users should carefully check retrieved material to ensure that documents were properly downloaded. On the World Wide Web, connect to the Federal Register at http:/ /www.access.gpo.gov/nara. Those without World Wide Web access can also connect with a local WAIS client, by Telnet to swais.access.gpo.gov, or by dialing (202) 512–1661 with a computer and modem. When using Telnet or modem, type swais, then log in as guest with no password. For more information about GPO Access, contact the GPO Access User Support Team by E-mail at [email protected]; by fax at (202) 512–1262; or call (202) 512–1530 or 1–888–293–6498 (toll free) between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time, Monday–Friday, except Federal holidays. The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper edition is $699, or $764 for a combined Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal Register including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $264. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The charge for individual copies in paper form is $10.00 for each issue, or $10.00 for each group of pages as actually bound; or $2.00 for each issue in microfiche form. All prices include regular domestic postage and handling. International customers please add 25% for foreign handling. Remit check or money order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO Deposit Account, VISA, MasterCard or Discover. Mail to: New Orders, Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250–7954. There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing in the Federal Register. How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and the page number. Example: 67 FR 12345.
.
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:18 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\04APWS.LOC pfrm07 PsN: 04APWS
2 III
Contents Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 65
Thursday, April 4, 2002
Agriculture Department Engineers Corps See Forest Service NOTICES See Rural Housing Service Environmental statements; notice of intent: See Rural Utilities Service Louisiana Coastal Area, LA; comprehensive coastwide ecosystem restoration feasibility study, 16093–16096 Antitrust Division NOTICES Environmental Protection Agency National cooperative research notifications: RULES Auto Body Consortium, Inc., 16124 Air quality implementation plans; approval and Portland Cement Association, 16124–16125 promulgation; various States: Water Heater Industry Joint Research and Development California, 16026–16027 Consortium, 16125 Hazardous waste: Wireless Application Protocol Forum, Ltd., 16125–16126 Identification and listing— Army Department Exclusions, 16261–16283 See Engineers Corps Pesticides; tolerances in food, animal feeds, and raw NOTICES agricultural commodities: Meetings: Benzene, etc., 16027–16030 Armed Forces Epidemiological Board, 16093 PROPOSED RULES Air pollutants, hazardous; national emission standards: Civil Rights Commission Miscellaneous organic chemical and coating NOTICES manufacturing, 16153–16259 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 16087 Pesticides; tolerances in food, animal feeds, and raw agricultural commodities: Coast Guard Methoxychlor, 16073–16078 RULES NOTICES Drawbridge operations: Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: New York, 16016 Regional pesticide environmental stewardship program, Ports and waterways safety: 16106–16107 New York Marine Inspection Zone and Captain of Port Toxic and hazardous substances control: Zone, NY; regulated navigation area and safety and New chemicals— security zones, 16016–16018 Receipt and status information, 16107–16111
Commerce Department Executive Office of the President See International Trade Administration See Management and Budget Office See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration See Patent and Trademark Office Federal Aviation Administration RULES Defense Department Airworthiness directives: See Army Department Fokker, 16011–16013 See Engineers Corps Standard instrument approach procedures, 16013–16016 NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Airworthiness directives: Agency information collection activities— Boeing, 16064–16067 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 16092– Bombardier, 16067–16069 16093 CFM International, 16069–16071 NOTICES Education Department Exemption petitions; summary and disposition, 16142 NOTICES Passenger facility charges; applications, etc.: Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Sarasota Manatee Airport Authority, FL, et al., 16142– Elementary and secondary education— 16144 Parental Information and Resource Centers Program, Technical standard orders: 16096–16099 Terrain Awareness and Warning System, 16144–16145 School Dropout Prevention Program, 16099–16100 Meetings: Excellence in Special Education, President’s Commission, Federal Election Commission 16100–16101 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 16111–16112 Energy Department See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Federal Emergency Management Agency PROPOSED RULES RULES Personnel Security Assistance Program; security police Flood insurance; communities eligible for sale: officer positions; eligibility requirements, 16061–16063 Various States, 16030–16032
VerDate 11
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission International Trade Administration PROPOSED RULES NOTICES Practice and procedure: Antidumping: Asset retirement obligations; accounting and reporting; Automotive replacement glass windshields from— technical conference, 16071–16073 China, 16087–16088 NOTICES In-shell raw pistachios from— Electric rate and corporate regulation filings: Iran, 16088 Public Service Co. of New Mexico et al., 16102–16103 Preserved mushrooms from— Environmental statements; availability, etc.: China, 16088–16089 Islander East Pipeline Co. L.L.C. et al., 16103–16104 Cheese quota; foreign government subsidies: Hydroelectric applications, 16104–16105 Quarterly update, 16089–16090 Practice and procedure: North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA); Off-the-record communications, 16105–16106 binational panel reviews: Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Greenhouse tomatoes from— Great Plains Power Inc., 16101 Canada, 16090–16091 Mirant Energy Trading, L.L.C., 16101–16102 Pure and alloy magnesium from— Canada, 16091 Federal Housing Finance Board Pure magnesium from— NOTICES Canada, 16091–16092 Meetings: Federal Home Loan Banks; capital plans; hearing, 16112 International Trade Commission Federal Railroad Administration NOTICES RULES Import investigations: Railroad locomotive safety standards: Abrasive products made using process for powder Locomotive cab sanitation standards, 16032–16052 preforms and products containing same, 16116– NOTICES 16118 Agency information collection activities: Silicomanganese from— Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 16145 Various countries, 16118
Federal Reserve System Justice Department NOTICES See Antitrust Division Banks and bank holding companies: NOTICES Change in bank control, 16112 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Formations, acquisitions, and mergers, 16112–16113 Community Oriented Policing Services Office— Tribal Resources Program, 16118–16119 Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board Universal Hiring Program, 16119–16120 NOTICES Immigration related employment discrimination; public Meetings; Sunshine Act, 16113 education programs, 16120–16122 Fish and Wildlife Service Pollution control; consent judgments: Agere Systems, Inc., et al., 16122–16123 NOTICES Atlantic Richfield Co. et al., 16123 Endangered and threatened species permit applications, Ferro Corp., 16123 16114–16115 Pharmacia Corp. et al., 16124 Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Anacapa Island Restoration Project, OR, 16115–16116 Land Management Bureau Forest Service NOTICES NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Environmental statements; notice of intent: Kelsey Whiskey landscape and Medford District resource Wayne National Forest, OH, 16082–16085 management plans, OR, 16116 Meetings: Resource Advisory Committees— Central Idaho, 16085 Library of Congress RULES General Services Administration Disclosure or production of records or information, 16018– NOTICES 16022 Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Agency information collection activities— Management and Budget Office Submission for OMB review; comment request, 16092– NOTICES 16093 Audits of States, local governments, and non-profit organizations (Circular A-133), 16138 Health and Human Services Department See National Institutes of Health Maritime Administration Interior Department NOTICES See Fish and Wildlife Service Agency information collection activities: See Land Management Bureau Proposed collection; comment request, 16146
VerDate 11
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Rural Housing Service NOTICES NOTICES Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Agency information collection activities— Community Facilities Program; tribal colleges, 16085– Submission for OMB review; comment request, 16092– 16087 16093 Meetings: Rural Utilities Service U.S. Centennial of Flight Commission, 16126 RULES Rural development: National Archives and Records Administration Distance Learning and Telemedicine Loan and Grant NOTICES Program Agency records schedules; availability, 16126–16128 Correction, 16011
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Securities and Exchange Commission RULES NOTICES Fuel economy standards: Securities: Light trucks; 2004 model year, 16052–16060 Suspension of trading— NOTICES NetAir.com, Inc., 16139 Motor vehicle safety standards: Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: Nonconforming vehicles— Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, 16139–16140 Importation eligibility; determinations, 16146–16149 National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., et al., National Institutes of Health 16140 NOTICES Meetings: Small Business Administration Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee, 16113 PROPOSED RULES National Institute of Child Health and Human Small business size standards: Development, 16113 Nonmanufacturer rule; waivers— National Institute of General Medical Sciences, 16113– Plain unmounted bearings and mounted bearings, 16114 16063–16064 National Institute on Aging, 16114 Scientific Review Center, 16114 Transportation Department See Coast Guard National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration See Federal Aviation Administration PROPOSED RULES See Federal Railroad Administration Fishery conservation and management: See Maritime Administration Northeastern United States fisheries— See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Monkfish, 16079–16081 NOTICES Aviation proceedings: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Certificates of public convenience and necessity and NOTICES foreign air carrier permits; weekly applications, Environmental statements; availability, etc.: 16141 Carolina Power & Light Co., 16132–16138 Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Federal Radionavigation Plan, 16141–16142 Honeywell International, Inc., 16128–16129 Omaha Public Power District, 16130–16132 Treasury Department NOTICES Ocean Policy Commission Agency information collection activities: NOTICES Submission for OMB review; comment request, 16149– Meetings, 16138 16150
Office of Management and Budget Veterans Affairs Department See Management and Budget Office RULES Organization, functions, and authority delegations: Patent and Trademark Office Board of Veterans Appeals— NOTICES Management and Administration, Director, 16023 Agency information collection activities: NOTICES Submission for OMB review; comment request, 16092 Meetings: Postal Service President’s Task Force to Improve Health Care Delivery RULES for Our Nation’s Veterans, 16150–16151 Organization, functions, and authority delegations: Inspector General, 16023–16026 Separate Parts In This Issue Public Health Service See National Institutes of Health Part II Environmental Protection Agency, 16153–16259 Railroad Retirement Board NOTICES Part III Meetings; Sunshine Act, 16138 Environmental Protection Agency, 16261–16283
VerDate 11
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// Reader Aids listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, settings); then follow the instructions. and notice of recently enacted public laws.
VerDate 11
CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE
A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue.
7 CFR 1703...... 16011 10 CFR Proposed Rules: 710...... 16061 13 CFR Proposed Rules: 121...... 16063 14 CFR 39...... 16011 97 (2 documents) ...... 16013, 16014 Proposed Rules: 39 (3 documents) ...... 16064, 16067, 16069 18 CFR Proposed Rules: Ch. I ...... 16071 33 CFR 117...... 16016 165...... 16016 36 CFR 703...... 16018 38 CFR Ch. I ...... 16023 39 CFR 224...... 16023 229...... 16023 230...... 16024 233...... 16023 266...... 16023 273...... 16023 40 CFR 52...... 16026 148...... 16262 180...... 16027 261...... 16262 268...... 16262 271...... 16262 302...... 16262 Proposed Rules: 63...... 16154 180...... 16073 44 CFR 64...... 16030 49 CFR 229...... 16032 533...... 16052 50 CFR Proposed Rules: 648...... 16079
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:18 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\04APLS.LOC pfrm07 PsN: 04APLS 16011
Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 65
Thursday, April 4, 2002
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER following the section heading, ‘‘(a)’’ [email protected]. Comments contains regulatory documents having general should read ‘‘(b)’’. sent via fax or the Internet must contain applicability and legal effect, most of which Dated: March 27, 2002. ‘‘Docket No. 2002–NM–94–AD’’ in the are keyed to and codified in the Code of subject line and need not be submitted Federal Regulations, which is published under Blaine D. Stockton, 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. in triplicate. Comments sent via the Internet as attached electronic files must [FR Doc. 02–7927 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for BILLING CODE 3410–15–P the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of Windows or ASCII text. new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each week. The information concerning this DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION amendment may be obtained from or examined at the Federal Aviation DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Federal Aviation Administration Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Rural Utilities Service 14 CFR Part 39 Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington [Docket No. 2002–NM–94–AD; Amendment 98055–4056. 7 CFR Part 1703 39–12697; AD 2002–07–03] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom RIN 0572–AB70 RIN 2120–AA64 Rodriquez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, Distance Learning and Telemedicine Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Loan and Grant Program; Correction Model F.28 Series Airplanes Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington AGENCY: Rural Utilities Service, USDA. AGENCY: Federal Aviation 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–1137; ACTION: Correction to direct final rule. Administration, DOT. fax (425) 227–1149. SUMMARY: This document contains a ACTION: Final rule; request for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA correction to the direct final rule, which comments. has received reports indicating that was published Wednesday, January 23, uncontained failure of the auxiliary SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a 2002 (67 FR 3039). The regulations power unit (APU) has occurred on three new airworthiness directive (AD) that is related to requirements for submitting Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0100 series applicable to all Fokker Model F.28 an application for financial assistance airplanes. In all cases, the overspeed of series airplanes. This action requires affecting the grant program. the APU caused uncontained failure of revising the Airplane Flight Manual to the turbine wheel of the APU with DATES: The direct final rule, which prohibit operation of the auxiliary consequent penetration of the aft published at 67 FR 3039, and the power unit (APU) during deicing. This correction, are effective March 11, 2002. action is necessary to prevent ingestion pressure bulkhead. Investigation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of deicing fluid into the APU, which revealed that deicing fluid was ingested Marilyn J. Morgan, Chief, DLT Branch, could cause uncontained failure of the into the APU inlet. The deicing fluid Advanced Services Division, Rural turbine wheel of the APU, and result in acted as an additional fuel source, Utilities Service, U.S. Department of failed and uncontained parts which resulted in runaway acceleration, Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave., penetrating the aft cabin pressure leading to failure of the turbine wheel. SW., STOP 1550, Washington, DC bulkhead, and consequent possible The deicing fluid entered into the APU 20250–1550. Telephone: 202–720–0413; injury to the cabin crew or passengers. through the intake air inlet on the upper e-mail at [email protected]; or, This action is intended to address the fuselage surface. This intake air inlet is Fax: 202–720–1051. identified unsafe condition. open only during operation of the APU. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DATES: Effective April 19, 2002. Subsequent to the first two occurrences of APU overspeed and turbine wheel Need for Correction Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or before failure, operators took actions to abate As published, the direct final rule May 6, 2002. the occurrences of deicing fluid getting contains an error and information that ADDRESSES: Submit comments in into the APU inlet through additional may be misleading and is in need of triplicate to the Federal Aviation warnings to flight crews and the clarification. Administration (FAA), Transport personnel performing the deicing. With Correction of Publication Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, the most recent event, the FAA has determined that those actions have not According, the publication on January Attention: Rules Docket No. 2002–NM– been totally effective and additional 23, 2002, which was the subject of FR 94–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., actions are warranted. Ingestion of Doc. 02–1537, is corrected as follows: Renton, Washington 98055–4056. On page 3041, in the first column, in Comments may be inspected at this deicing fluid into the APU could cause amendatory instruction 9., in the second location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 uncontained failure of the turbine wheel line, ‘‘(a)(4)’’ should read ‘‘(b)(4)’’. p.m., Monday through Friday, except of the APU due to overspeed, and result Federal holidays. Comments may be in failed and uncontained parts § 1703.126 [Corrected] submitted via fax to (425) 227–1232. penetrating the aft cabin pressure On the same page, in the same Comments may also be sent via the bulkhead, and consequent possible column, in §1703.126, in the first line Internet using the following address: 9- injury to the cabin crew or passengers.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16012 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
Similar Design of the Intake Air Inlet Comments Invited have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. The APU intake air inlet operation Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves requirements The FAA has determined that this and location on Fokker Model F.28 regulation is an emergency regulation Mark 0100 series airplanes is the same affecting flight safety and, thus, was not preceded by notice and an opportunity that must be issued immediately to on Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0070, 1000, correct an unsafe condition in aircraft, 2000, 3000, and 4000 series airplanes; for public comment, comments are invited on this rule. Interested persons and that it is not a ‘‘significant therefore, all these models may be regulatory action’’ under Executive subject to this same unsafe condition. are invited to comment on this rule by submitting such written data, views, or Order 12866. It has been determined U.S. Type Certification of the Airplane arguments as they may desire. further that this action involves an Communications shall identify the emergency regulation under DOT These series airplanes are Rules Docket number and be submitted Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 manufactured in the Netherlands and in triplicate to the address specified FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is determined that this emergency are type certificated for operation in the under the caption ADDRESSES. All United States under the provisions of communications received on or before regulation otherwise would be § 21.29 of the Federal Aviation the closing date for comments will be significant under DOT Regulatory Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the considered, and this rule may be Policies and Procedures, a final applicable bilateral airworthiness amended in light of the comments regulatory evaluation will be prepared agreement. received. Factual information that and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy of it, if filed, may be obtained from the Explanation of Requirements of Rule supports the commenter’s ideas and suggestions is extremely helpful in Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES. Since an unsafe condition has been evaluating the effectiveness of the AD identified that is likely to exist or action and determining whether List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 additional rulemaking action would be develop on other airplanes of the same Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation needed. type design registered in the United safety, Safety. States, this AD is being issued to Submit comments using the following prevent ingestion of deicing fluid into format: Adoption of the Amendment • the APU, which could cause Organize comments issue-by-issue. Accordingly, pursuant to the uncontained failure of the turbine wheel For example, discuss a request to authority delegated to me by the of the APU and result in failed and change the compliance time and a Administrator, the Federal Aviation uncontained parts penetrating the aft request to change the service bulletin Administration amends part 39 of the cabin pressure bulkhead, and reference as two separate issues. Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR • consequent possible injury to the cabin For each issue, state what specific part 39) as follows: crew or passengers. This AD requires change to the AD is being requested. • revision of the Limitations Section of Include justification (e.g., reasons or PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS the Airplane Flight Manual to prohibit data) for each request. DIRECTIVES operation of the APU during deicing. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, economic, 1. The authority citation for part 39 Determination of Rule’s Effective Date environmental, and energy aspects of continues to read as follows: the rule that might suggest a need to Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Since a situation exists that requires modify the rule. All comments the immediate adoption of this submitted will be available, both before § 39.13 [Amended] regulation, it is found that notice and and after the closing date for comments, 2. Section 39.13 is amended by opportunity for prior public comment in the Rules Docket for examination by adding the following new airworthiness hereon are impracticable, and that good interested persons. A report that directive: cause exists for making this amendment summarizes each FAA-public contact effective in less than 30 days. 2002–07–03 Fokker Services B.V.: concerned with the substance of this AD Amendment 39–12697. Docket 2002– Both major airlines operating the F.28 will be filed in the Rules Docket. NM–94–AD. Mark 0100 series airplanes have Commenters wishing the FAA to Applicability: All Model F.28 series voluntarily applied the restriction to acknowledge receipt of their comments airplanes, certificated in any category. their operations procedures to prohibit submitted in response to this rule must Compliance: Required as indicated, unless operation of the APU during deicing. In submit a self-addressed, stamped accomplished previously. consideration of that information, the To prevent ingestion of deicing fluid into postcard on which the following the auxiliary power unit (APU), which could FAA has determined that telegraphic statement is made: ‘‘Comments to cause uncontained failure of the turbine notification of this action to those Docket Number 2002–NM–94–AD.’’ The wheel of the APU, and result in failed and operators is not necessary, since all postcard will be date stamped and uncontained parts penetrating the aft cabin operators are currently in compliance. returned to the commenter. pressure bulkhead, and consequent possible However, the issuance of this injury to the cabin crew or passengers; immediately adopted rule is necessary Regulatory Impact accomplish the following: to ensure that any affected airplane that The regulations adopted herein will Revising the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) is imported and placed on the U.S. not have a substantial direct effect on Register in the future will be required to the States, on the relationship between (a) Within 14 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the Limitations Section of be in compliance as well. Issuance of the national Government and the States, the FAA-approved AFM to include the this rule will ensure that the AFM is or on the distribution of power and following statement (this may be revised accordingly in all affected responsibilities among the various accomplished by inserting a copy of this AD airplanes, prior to the time it is levels of government. Therefore, it is into the AFM): ‘‘APU operations during permitted to operate in the U.S. determined that this final rule does not deicing is prohibited.’’
VerDate 11
Alternative Methods of Compliance DATES: An effective date for each SIAP special format make their verbatim (b) An alternative method of compliance or is specified in the amendatory publication in the Federal Register adjustment of the compliance time that provisions. expensive and impractical. Further, provides an acceptable level of safety may be Incorporation by reference-approved airmen do not use the regulatory text of used if approved by the Manager, by the Director of the Federal Register the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic International Branch, ANM–116, Transport on December 31, 1980, and reapproved depiction on charts printed by Airplane Directorate, FAA. Operators shall as of January 1, 1982. submit their requests through an appropriate publishers of aeronautical materials. FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who ADDRESSES: Availability of matters Thus, the advantages of incorporation may add comments and then send it to the incorporated by reference in the by reference are realized and Manager, International Branch, ANM–116. amendment is as follows: publication of the complete description Note 1: Information concerning the For Examination: of each SIAP contained in FAA form existence of approved alternative methods of 1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA documents is unnecessary. The compliance with this AD, if any, may be Headquarters Building, 800 provisions of this amendment state the obtained from the International Branch, Independence Avenue, SW., ANM–116. affected CFR (and FAR) sections, with Washington, DC 20591; the types and effective dates of the Special Flight Permits 2. The FAA Regional Office of the SIAPs. This amendment also identifies (c) Special flight permits may be issued in region in which the affected airport is the airport, its location, the procedure accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the located; or identification and the amendment Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 3. The Flight Inspection Area Office number. and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a which originated the SIAP. location where the requirements of this AD For Purchase: The Rule can be accomplished. Individual SIAP copies may be This amendment to part 97 is effective Effective Date obtained from: upon publication of each separate SIAP (d) This amendment becomes effective on 1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA– as contained in the transmittal. Some 200), FAA Headquarters Building, 800 April 19, 2002. SIAP amendments may have been Independence Avenue, SW., Issued in Renton, Washington, on March previously issued by the FAA in a Washington, DC 20591; or 28, 2002. National Flight Data Center (NFDC) to Kalene C. Yanamura, 2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected airport is Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency Acting Manager, Transport Airplane located. action of immediate flight safety relating Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. directly to published aeronautical By Subscription: [FR Doc. 02–8172 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] charts. The circumstances which BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Copies of all SIAPs, mailed once every 2 weeks, are for sale by the created the need for some SIAP Superintendent of Documents, U.S. amendments may require making them effective in less than 30 days. For the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402. remaining SIAPs, an effective date at least 30 days after publication is Federal Aviation Administration FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald P. Pate, Flight Procedure provided. 14 CFR Part 97 Standards Branch (AMCAFS–420), Further, the SIAPs contained in this Flight Technologies and Programs amendment are based on the criteria [Docket No. 30302; Amdt. No. 2099] Division, Flight Standards Service, contained in the U.S. Standard for Federal Aviation Administration, Mike Terminal Instrument Procedures Standard Instrument Approach Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 (TERPS). In developing these SIAPs, the Procedures; Miscellaneous South MacArthur Blvd. Oklahoma City, TERPS criteria were applied to the Amendments OK 73169 (Mail Address: PO Box 25082, conditions existing or anticipated at the Oklahoma City, OK 73125) telephone: affected airports. Because of the close AGENCY: Federal Aviation (405) 954–4164. and immediate relationship between Administration (FAA), DOT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This these SIAPs and safety in air commerce, ACTION: Final rule. amendment to part 97 of the Federal I find that notice and public procedure Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 97) before adopting these SIAPs are SUMMARY: This amendment establishes, establishes, amends, suspends, or impracticable and contrary to the public amends, suspends, or revokes Standards revokes Standard Instrument Approach interest and, where applicable, that Instrument Approach Procedures Procedures (SIAPs). The complete good cause exists for making some (SIAPs) for operations at certain regulatory description of each SIAP is SIAPs effective in less than 30 days. airports. These regulatory actions are contained in official FAA form needed because of the adoption of new documents which are incorporated by Conclusion or revised criteria, or because of changes reference in this amendment under 5 occurring in the National Airspace U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and § 97.20 The FAA has determined that this System, such as the commissioning of of the Federal Aviation Regulations regulation only involves an established new navigational facilities, addition of (FAR). The application FAA Forms are body of technical regulations for which new obstacles, or changes in air traffic identified as FAA Forms 8260–3, 8260– frequent and routine amendments are requirements. These changes are 4, and 8260–5. Materials incorporated necessary to keep them operationally designed to provide safe and efficient by reference are available for current. It, therefore—(1) is not a use of the navigable airspace and to examination or purchase as stated ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under promote safe flight operations under above. Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a instrument flight rules at the affected The large number of SIAPs, their ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT airports. complex nature, and the need for a
VerDate 11
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 Amdt 2 RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Orig FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort Sidney MT, Sidney-Richland Muni, does not warrant preparation of a Worth International, ILS RWY 17R, GPS RWY 1, Orig, CANCELLED regulatory evaluation as the anticipated Amdt 21 Sidney MT, Sidney-Richland Muni, impact is so minimal. For the same Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort GPS RWY 19, Orig, CANCELLED reason, the FAA certifies that this Worth International, CONVERGING Sidney MC, Shelby Muni, RNAV amendment will not have a significant ILS RWY 17R, Amdt 7 (GSP) RWY 5, Orig economic impact on a substantial Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort The FAA published an Amendment number of small entities under the Worth International, ILS RWY 31R, in Docket No. 30300, Amdt. No. 2097 to criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Amdt 12 Part 97 of the Federal Aviation Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort Regulations (Vol. 67 No. 56 Page; 13271 List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97 Worth International, CONVERGING dated Friday, March 22, 2002) under Air Traffic Control, Airports, ILS RWY 31R, Amdt 6 section 97.23 effective 16 May 2002 is Navigation (Air). Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort hereby rescinded: Issued in Washington, DC on March 29, Worth International, ILS RWY 35L, Sacramento, CA, Sacramento Mather, 2002. Amdt 3 VOR RWY 4R, Orig-D James J. Ballough, Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort Worth International, CONVERGING [FR Doc. 02–8148 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Director, Flight Standards Service. ILS RWY 35L, Amdt 2 BILLING CODE 4910–13–M Adoption of the Amendment Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort Worth International, ILS RWY 35R, Accordingly, pursuant to the Amdt 2 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION authority delegated to me, part 97 of the Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort Federal Aviation Administration Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Worth International, RNAV (GPS) part 97) is amended by establishing, RWY 13R, Orig 14 CFR Part 97 amending, suspending, or revoking Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort Standard Instrument Approach Worth International, RNAV (GPS) [Docket No. 30303; Amdt. No. 3000] Procedures, effective at 0901 UTC on RWY 17L Orig the dates specified, as follow: Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort Standard Instrument Approach Worth International, GPS RWY 17L, Procedures; Miscellaneous PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT Orig CANCELLED Amendments APPROACH PROCEDURES Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort AGENCY: Federal Aviation 1. The authority citation for part 97 is Worth International, RNAV (GPS) Administration (FAA), DOT. RWY 17R, Orig revised to read as follows: ACTION: Final rule. Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120, 44701; and 14 CFR 11.49(b)(2). Worth International, GPS RWY 17R, SUMMARY: This amendment establishes, Orig CANCELLED amends, suspends, or revokes Standard §§ 97.23, 97.25, 97.27, 97.29, 97.31, 97.33, Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort Instrument Approach Procedures and 97.35 [Amended] Worth International, RNAV (GPS) (SIAPs) for operations at certain RWY 31R, Orig airports. These regulatory actions are 2. Part 97 is amended to read as Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort needed because of changes occurring in follows: Worth International, GPS RWY 31R, the National Airspace System, such as By amending § 97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, Orig-A CANCELLED the commissioning of new navigational VOR or TRACAN, and VOR/DME or TACAN; Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort facilities, addition of new obstacles, or § 97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, Worth International, RNAV (GPS) changes in air traffic requirements. SDF, SDF/DME; § 97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; RWY 35L Orig § 97.ILS, ILS/DME, ISMLS, MLS, MLS/DME, These changes are designed to provide Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort safe and efficient use of the navigable MLS/RNAV; § 97.31 RADAR SIAPs; § 97.33 Worth International, GPS RWY 35L RNAV SIAPs; and § 97.35 COPTER SIAPs, airspace and to promote safe flight identified as follows Orig CANCELLED operations under instrument flight rules Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort at the affected airports. *** Effective April 18, 2002 Worth International, RNAV (GPS) DATES: An effective date for each SIAP San Jose, CA, San Jose International RWY 35R, Orig is specified in the amendatory VOR–A, Orig Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort provisions. San Jose, CA, San Jose International Worth International, GPS RWY 35R, VOR/DME RWY 30R, Orig Incorporation by reference-approved Orig CANCELLED by the Director of the Federal Register San Jose, CA, San Jose International Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort on December 31, 1980, and reapproved RNAV (GPS) RWY 12L Orig Worth International, RNAV (GPS) as of January 1, 1982. San Jose, CA, San Jose International RWY 36L, Orig RNAV (GPS) RWY 30R, Orig Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort ADDRESSES: Availability of matter Red Wing NM, Red Wing Regional, Worth International, RNAV (GPS) incorporated by reference in the ILS RWY 9, Orig RWY 36R, Orig amendment is as follows: Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort * * * Effective May 16, 2002 For Examination: Worth International, ILS RWY 13R, Detroit, MI, Detroit Metropolitan 1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Amdt 6 Wayne County, ILS RWY 22R, Headquarters Building, 800 Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort Amdt 1 Independence Avenue, SW., Worth International, CONVERGING * * * Effective June 13, 2002 Washington, DC 20591; ILS RWY 13R, Amdt 5 Sidney MT, Sidney-Richland Muni, 2. The FAA Regional Office of the Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Dallas/Fort RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Orig region in which affected airport is Worth International, ILS RWY 17L Sidney MT, Sidney-Richland Muni, located; or
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16015
3. The Flight Inspection Area Office publication of the complete description body of technical regulations for which which originated the SIAP. of each SIAP contained in FAA form frequent and routine amendments are For Purchase: documents is unnecessary. The necessary to keep them operationally Individual SIAP copies may be provisions of this amendment state the current. It, therefore—(1) is not a obtained from: affected CFR (and FAR) sections, with ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA– the types and effective dates of the Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a 200), FAA Headquarters Building, 800 SIAPs. This amendment also identifies ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT Independence Avenue, SW., the airport, its location, the procedure Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 Washington, DC 20591; or identification and the amendment FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) 2. The FAA Regional Office of the number. does not warrant preparation of a region in which the affected airport is The Rule regulatory evaluation as the anticipated located. impact is so minimal. For the same This amendment to part 97 of the reason, the FAA certifies that this By Subscription: Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR amendment will not have a significant Copies of all SIAPs, mailed once part 97) establishes, amends, suspends, economic impact on a substantial every 2 weeks, are for sale by the or revokes SIAPs. For safety and number of small entities under the Superintendent of Documents, US timeliness of change considerations, this criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Government Printing Office, amendment incorporates only specific Washington, DC 20402. changes contained in the content of the List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97 following FDC/P NOTAMs for each FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Air Traffic Control, Airports, SIAP. The SIAP information in some Donald P. Pate, Flight Procedure Navigation (Air). Standards Branch (AMCAFS–420), previously designated FDC/Temporary Flight Technologies and Programs (FDC/T) NOTAMs is of such duration as Issued in Washington, DC on March 29, 2002. Division, Flight Standards Service, to be permanent. With conversion to Federal Aviation Administration, Mike FDC/P NOTAMs, the respective FDC/T James J. Ballough, Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 NOTAMs have been canceled. Director, Flight Standards Service. The FDC/P NOTAMs for the SIAPs South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, Adoption of the Amendment OK 73169 (Mail Address: PO Box 25082, contained in this amendment are based Oklahoma City, OK 73125) telephone: on the criteria in the U.S. Standard for Accordingly, pursuant to the (405) 954–4164. Terminal Instrument Procedures authority delegated to me, part 97 of the (TERPS). In developing these chart SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR This changes to SIAPs by FDC/P NOTAMs, amendment to part 97 of the Federal part 97) is amended by establishing, the TERPS criteria were applied to only amending, suspending, or revoking Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 97) these specific conditions existing at the Standard Instrument Approach establishes, amends, suspends, or affected airports. All SIAP amendments Procedures, effective at 0901 UTC on revokes Standard Instrument Approach in this rule have been previously issued the dates specified, as follows: Procedures (SIAPs). The complete by the FAA in a National Flight Data regulatory description on each SIAP is Center (FDC) Notice to Airmen contained in the appropriate FAA Form PART 97—STANDARD INSTRUMENT (NOTAM) as an emergency action of APPROACH PROCEDURES 8260 and the National Flight Data immediate flight safety relating directly Center (FDC)/Permanent (P) Notices to to published aeronautical charts. The 1. The authority citation for part 97 is Airmen (NOTAM) which are circumstances which created the need revised to read as follows: incorporated by reference in the for all these SIAP amendments requires Authority: 49 U.S.C. 40103, 40113, 40120, amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 making them effective in less than 30 CFR part 51, and § 97.20 of the Federal 44701; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); and 14 CFR days. 11.49(b)(2). Aviation Regulations (FAR). Materials Further, the SIAPs contained in this incorporated by reference are available amendment are based on the criteria for examination or purchase as stated §§ 97.23, 97.25, 97.27, 97.29, 97.31, 97.33, contained in the TERPS. Because of the and 97.35 [Amended] above. close and immediate relationship The large number of SIAPs, their between these SIAPs and safety in air 2. Part 97 is amended to read as complex nature, and the need for a commerce, I find that notice and public follows: special format make their verbatim procedure before adopting these SIAPs By amending: § 97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, publication in the Federal Register are impracticable and contrary to the VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or TACAN; expensive and impractical. Further, public interest and, where applicable, § 97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, airmen do not use the regulatory text of that good cause exists for making these SDF, SDF/DME; § 97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; § 97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, ISMLS, MLS/DME, the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic SIAPS effective in less than 30 days. depiction of charts printed by MLS/RNAV; § 97.31 RADAR SIAPs; § 97.33 Conclusion RNAV SIAPs; and § 97.35 COPTER SIAPs, publishers of aeronautical materials. identified as follows: Thus, the advantages of incorporation The FAA has determined that this by reference are realized and regulation only involves an established Effective Upon Publication.
FDC date STATE CITY AIRPORT FDC NUMBER SUBJECT
03/11/02 ...... GA ATLANTA ...... DEKALB-PEACHTREE ... 2/2083 ILS RWY 20L, AMDT 7B 03/11/02 ...... GA ATLANTA ...... DEKALB-PEACHTREE ... 2/2084 VOR/DME OR GPS RWY 20L, AMDT 1A 03/11/02 ...... GA ATLANTA ...... THE WILLIAM B. 2/2089 RNAV (GPS) RWY 27L ORIG HARTSFIELD AT- LANTA INTL. 03/12/02 ...... NY NEW YORK ...... JOHN F. KENNEDY ...... 2/2149 RNAV (GPS)RWY 31R, ORIG
VerDate 11
FDC date STATE CITY AIRPORT FDC NUMBER SUBJECT
03/13/02 ...... GA METTER ...... METTER MUNI ...... 2/2172 NDB OR GPS RWY 10, AMDT 2 03/14/02 ...... OH ZANESVILLE ...... ZANESVILLE MUNI ...... 2/2203 VOR OR GPS RWY 4, AMDT 6 03/14/02 ...... OH OTTAWA ...... PUTNAM COUNTY ...... 2/2209 VOR OR GPS RWY 27, AMDT 1 03/14/02 ...... OH TIFFIN ...... SENECA COUNTY ...... 2/2210 VOR OR GPS RWY 6, AMDT 8 03/14/02 ...... OH OTTAWA ...... PUTNAM COUNTY ...... 2/2211 NDB RWY 27, AMDT 1A 03/14/02 ...... OH TIFFIN ...... SENECA COUNTY ...... 2/2212 NDB RWY 24, AMDT 7A 03/14/02 ...... OH TIFFIN ...... SENECA COUNTY ...... 2/2213 GPS RWY 24, ORIG 03/14/02 ...... OH BLUFFTON ...... BLUFFTON ...... 2/2214 VOR OR GPS RWY 23, AMDT 6 03/14/02 ...... OH FOSTORIA ...... FOSTORIA METROPOLI- 2/2215 VOR OR GPS-A, AMDT 3A TAN. 03/14/02 ...... OH FOSTORIA ...... FOSTORIA METROPOLI- 2/2216 NDB OR GPS RWY 27, AMDT 4B TAN. 03/14/02 ...... OH KENTON ...... HARDIN COUNTY ...... 2/2217 VOR/DME RNAV OR GPS RWY 22, AMDT 1 03/14/02 ...... OH KENTON ...... HARDIN COUNTY ...... 2/2218 VOR OR GPS–A, AMDT 3 03/14/02 ...... OH UPPER SANDUSKY ...... WYANDOT COUNTY ...... 2/2219 VOR OR GPS–A, AMDT 3 03/15/02 ...... GA BRUNSWICK ...... GLYNCO JETPORT ...... 2/2240 ILS RWY 7, AMDT 8 03/15/02 ...... GA BRUNSWICK ...... GLYNCO JETPORT ...... 2/2241 VOR/DME OR GPS–B, AMDT 7 03/15/02 ...... GA BRUNSWICK ...... BLYNCO JETPORT ...... 2/2242 NDB RWY 7, AMDT 10 03/19/02 ...... MN RED WING ...... RED WING REGIONAL .. 2/2276 RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, ORIG 03/19/02 ...... MN RED WING ...... RED WING REGIONAL .. 2/2277 RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, ORIG 03/20/02 ...... NC BEAUFORT ...... MICHAEL J. SMITH 2/2325 RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, ORIG FIELD. 03/20/02 ...... IN GRIFFITH ...... GRIFFITH- 2/2333 VOR OR GPS RWY 8, AMDT 7 MERRILLVILLE. 03/20/02 ...... IN LOGANSPORT ...... LOGANSPORT MUNI ..... 2/2335 NDB RWY 9, AMDT 2 03/21/02 ...... IA PELLA ...... PELLA MUNI ...... 2/2347 NDB RWY 34, AMDT 7A 03/25/02 ...... IN EVANSVILLE ...... EVANSVILLE REGIONAL 2/2453 NDB OR GPS RWY 22, AMDT 12A 03/25/02 ...... IN EVANSVILLE ...... EVANSVILLE REGIONAL 2/2454 ILS RWY 22, AMDT 20A 03/25/02 ...... IN EVANSVILLE ...... EVANSVILLE REGIONAL 2/2455 RADAR-1, AMDT 5A 03/25/02 ...... IN EVANSVILLE ...... EVANSVILLE REGIONAL 2/2458 VOR OR GPS RWY 4, AMDT 5B
[FR Doc. 02–8147 Filed 4–03–02; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The bridge Dated: March 21, 2002. BILLING CODE 4910–13–M owner, the National Railroad Passenger G.N. Naccara, Corporation (Amtrak), requested a Rear Admiral, Coast Guard, Commander, temporary deviation from the First Coast Guard District. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION drawbridge operating regulations to [FR Doc. 02–8182 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] facilitate necessary maintenance, BILLING CODE 4910–15–P Coast Guard replacement of pinion gears and the 33 CFR Part 117 rack, at the bridge. The performance of these repairs require the bridge to DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [CGD01–02–037] remain in the closed position. Coast Guard Drawbridge Operation Regulations: The Coast Guard and the owner of the Hutchinson River, NY bridge coordinated this closure with the 33 CFR Part 165 mariners that normally use this AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. waterway to help facilitate this [CGD01–01–181] ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation necessary bridge repair and to minimize from regulations. any disruption to the marine RIN 2115–AE84 and 2115–AA97 transportation system. Therefore, as a SUMMARY: The Commander, First Coast Regulated Navigation Area and Safety result of that coordination effort, a Guard District, has issued a temporary and Security Zones; New York Marine deviation from the drawbridge operation temporary deviation from the Inspection Zone and Captain of the regulations for the Pelham Bay railroad drawbridge operation regulations has Port Zone bridge, mile 0.5, across the Hutchinson been approved. Under this temporary River at New York. This temporary deviation the Pelham Bay railroad AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT. deviation will allow the bridge to bridge will not open for vessel traffic ACTION: Temporary final rule. remain closed to navigation from 10 from 10 a.m. on April 18, 2002 through SUMMARY: a.m. on April 18, 2002 through 5 a.m. 5 a.m. on April 19, 2002, and from 10 The Coast Guard is extending on April 19, 2002, and from 10 a.m. on a.m. on April 22, 2002 through 5 a.m. the effective period of the regulated April 22, 2002 through 5 a.m. on April on April 23, 2002. navigation area (RNA) and safety and security zones published October 10, 23, 2002, to facilitate repairs at the This deviation from the operating bridge. 2001. This change will extend the regulations is authorized under 33 CFR effective date of the temporary final rule DATES: This deviation is effective from 117.35, and will be performed with all until August 15, 2002, allowing April 18, 2002 through April 23, 2002. due speed in order to return the bridge adequate time for informal rulemaking FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: to normal operation as soon as possible. to develop a permanent rule. This rule Joseph Schmied, Project Officer, First will continue to prohibit vessels from Coast Guard District, at (212) 668–7195. entering certain areas of the port and
VerDate 11
impose restrictions on vessel operations foreseeable security environment within Executive Order 12886, Regulatory in other areas. the Port of New York. Planning and Review, and does not DATES: Sections 165.T01–165 and Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast require an assessment of potential costs 165.T01–166 added at 66 FR 15161 Guard finds that good cause exists for and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that effective September 28, 2001 through making this rule effective less than 30 Order. The Office of Management and April 8, 2002 are extended in effect days after publication in the Federal Budget has not reviewed it under that through August 15, 2002. Sections Register. The measures contemplated by Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the 165.T01–165(c) and 165.T01–166(b) are the rule were intended to facilitate regulatory policies and procedures of revised effective April 4, 2002 and will ongoing response efforts and prevent the Department of Transportation (DOT) remain effective until August 15, 2002. future terrorist attack. The Coast Guard (44 FR 11040, February 26, 1979). will be publishing a NPRM to establish The Coast Guard expects the ADDRESSES: Documents as indicated in permanent safety and security zones economic impact of this final rule to be this preamble are available for that are temporarily effective under this so minimal that a full Regulatory inspection and copying at Coast Guard rule. This revision preserves the status Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the Activities New York, 212 Coast Guard quo within the Port while permanent regulatory policies and procedures of Drive, room 204, Staten Island, New rules are developed. There is no DOT is unnecessary. This finding is York 10305, between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., indication that the present TFR has been based on the sizes of the zones are the Monday through Friday, except Federal burdensome on the maritime public. minimum necessary to provide adequate holidays. The public was invited to comment protection for the public, vessels, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: upon or suggest modifications to the vessel crews. Any vessels seeking entry Lieutenant M. Day, Waterways scope of the existing TFR by submitting into or movement within the safety and Oversight Branch, Coast Guard written comments within 60 days of its security zones must request permission Activities New York (718) 354–4012. publication in the Federal Register. from the Captain of the Port or his SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: None were received. authorized patrol representative. Any hardships experienced by persons or Background and Purpose Regulatory Information vessels are considered minimal Terrorist attacks against the World On October 10, 2001, we published a compared to the national interest Trade Center in Manhattan, New York protecting the public, vessels, and temporary final rule (TFR) entitled on September 11, 2001 inflicted ‘‘Regulated Navigation Area and Safety vessel crews from the further catastrophic human casualties and devastating consequences of the and Security Zones; New York Marine property damage. Federal, state and Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port aforementioned acts of terrorism, and local personnel are engaged in ongoing from potential future sabotage or other Zone’’ in the Federal Register (66 FR efforts to secure other potential terrorist 51558–51562). The effective period for subversive acts, accidents, or other targets from attack. The Coast Guard causes of a similar nature. this rule was from September 28, 2001, established regulated navigation areas through April 8, 2002. Although the rule The Coast Guard will be publishing a (RNAs) and safety and security zones NPRM to establish permanent safety and was published without advance notice within defined areas of water in order of proposed rulemaking, an opportunity security zones that are temporarily to facilitate emergency response and effective under this rule. for public comment was provided. The rescue activities, protect human life, comment period closed on December and safeguard vessels and waterfront Small Entities 10, 2001. The Coast Guard received no facilities from sabotage or terrorist Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act letters commenting on the temporary attacks. (5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered rule. No public hearing was requested, As we mentioned in the original TFR, whether this rule would have a and none was held. these regulations were designed to significant economic impact on a We did not publish a notice of provide the Captain of the Port of New substantial number of small entities. proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this York with maximum flexibility to The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3), the respond to emergent threats and small businesses, not-for-profit Coast Guard finds that good cause exists dangerous conditions. When less organizations that are independently for not publishing an NPRM. The stringent security measures are required, owned and operated and are not original TFR was urgently required to the Captain of the Port communicates dominant in their fields, and facilitate emergency services responding relaxed enforcement policies to the governmental jurisdictions with to terrorist attacks upon the World public. As a result, the full scope of populations of less than 50,000. Trade Center in Manhattan, NY, and to these regulations is rarely imposed. For the reasons addressed under the prevent future terrorist strikes within Nevertheless, the flexibility to utilize Regulatory Evaluation above, the Coast and adjacent to the Port of New York/ those measures permitted by the TFR Guard expects the impact of this New Jersey. and required by the circumstances is regulation to be minimal and certifies It was anticipated that we would vital to ensure port security in the under section 605(b) of the Regulatory assess the security environment at the present environment. Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612) that end of the effective period to determine The temporary rule is only effective this final rule will not have a significant whether continuing security precautions until April 8, 2002. The Coast Guard is economic impact on a substantial were required and, if so, to propose extending the effective date of this rule number of small entities. Maritime regulations responsive to existing until August 15, 2002, to allow the advisories will be initiated by normal conditions. We have determined the establishment of permanent safety and methods and means and will be widely need for continued security regulations security zones by notice and comment available to users of the area. exists. The Coast Guard will utilize the rulemaking. extended effective period of this TFR to Assistance for Small Entities engage in notice and comment Regulatory Evaluation Under section 213(a) of the Small rulemaking to develop permanent This rule is not a ‘‘significant Business Regulatory Enforcement regulations tailored to the present and regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121),
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16018 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
we offered to assist small entities in Civil Justice Reform Regulation understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate its effects on them This rule meets applicable standards For the reasons discussed in the and participate in the rulemaking in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 process. If the rule would affect your Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to CFR part 165 as follows: small business, organization, or minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION governmental jurisdiction and you have AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS questions concerning its provisions or Protection of Children options for compliance, please contact 1. The authority citation for part 165 Lieutenant M. Day, Waterways We have analyzed this rule under continues to read as follows: Executive Order 13045, Protection of Oversight Branch, Coast Guard Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; Activities New York (718) 354–4012. Children from Environmental Health 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; 49 Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not CFR 1.46. Small Businesses may send comments an economically significant rule and on the actions of Federal employees does not create an environmental risk to 2. In temporary § 165.T01–165, revise who enforce, or otherwise determine health or risk to safety that may paragraph (c) to read as follows: compliance with, Federal regulations to disproportionately affect children. the Small Business and Agriculture § 165.T01–165 Regulated Navigation Area: Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman Indian Tribal Governments New York Marine Inspection Zone and Captain of the Port Zone. and the Regional Small Business This rule does not have tribal Regulatory Fairness Boards. The * * * * * implications under Executive Order Ombudsman evaluates these actions (c) Effective dates. This section is 13175, Consultation and Coordination annually and rates each agency’s effective from September 28, 2001 with Indian Tribal Governments, responsiveness to small business. If you through August 15, 2002. because it does not have a substantial wish to comment on actions by * * * * * direct effect on one or more Indian employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– 3. In temporary § 165.T01–166, revise tribes, on the relationship between the 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). paragraph (b) to read as follows: Federal Government and Indian tribes, Collection of Information or on the distribution of power and § 165.T01–166 Safety and Security Zones: responsibilities between the Federal New York Marine Inspection Zone and This rule calls for no new collection Government and Indian tribes. Captain of the Port Zone. of information requirements under the * * * * * Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Environment (b) Effective dates. This section is 3501–3520). We have considered the effective from September 28, 2001 Federalism environmental impact of this rule and through August 15, 2002. concluded that under figure 2–1, * * * * * A rule has implications for federalism paragraph 34(g), of Commandant Dated: March 27, 2002. under Executive Order 13132, Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is G.N. Naccara, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct categorically excluded from further effect on State or local governments and Rear Admiral, Coast Guard, District environmental documentation. A Commander, First Coast Guard District. would either preempt State law or ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ [FR Doc. 02–8079 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] impose a substantial direct cost of is available in the docket for inspection compliance on them. We have analyzed or copying where indicated under BILLING CODE 4910–15–P this rule under that Order and have ADDRESSES. determined that it does not have implications for federalism. Energy Effects LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Unfunded Mandates We have analyzed this rule under 36 CFR Part 703 Executive Order 13211, Actions The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Concerning Regulations That [Docket No. LOC 02–1] of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Federal agencies to assess the effects of Distribution, or Use. We have Disclosure or Production of Records their discretionary regulatory actions. In determined that it is not a ‘‘significant or Information particular, the Act addresses actions energy action’’ under that Order because AGENCY: Library of Congress. that may result in the expenditure by a it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ ACTION: Final regulation. State, local, or tribal government, in the under Executive Order 12866 and is not aggregate, or by the private sector of likely to have a significant adverse effect SUMMARY: The Library of Congress $100,000,000 or more in any one year. on the supply, distribution, or use of issues this final regulation to include, in Though this rule will not result in such energy. It has not been designated by the addition to information about public an expenditure, we do discuss the Administrator of the Office of availability of Library of Congress effects of this rule elsewhere in this Information and Regulatory Affairs as a records, the information contained in preamble. significant energy action. Therefore, it new Library of Congress Regulation Taking Of Private Property does not require a Statement of Energy 1917–4, Testimony by Employees and Effects under Executive Order 13211. Production of Documents in Certain This rule will not effect a taking of List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Legal Proceedings Where the Library is private property or otherwise have Not a Party (see 36 CFR 703.10 et seq.). taking implications under Executive Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation This new regulation centralizes the Order 12630, Governmental Actions and (water), Reporting and recordkeeping Library’s determinations, to the greatest Interference with Constitutionally requirements, Security Measures, extent possible, concerning responses to Protected Property Rights. Waterways. subpoenas in matters where the Library
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16019
is not a party. Further it sets forth the Final Regulation taken under the copyright law. The standards by which the Library will Copyright Office has published its own In consideration of the foregoing the comply or not with such subpoenas and regulation with respect to the general Library of Congress revises 36 CFR part specifies the means of serving those availability of information (see 37 CFR 703 as follows: subpoenas. The regulation also gives 201.2) and requests for copyright due consideration to the particular PART 703—DISCLOSURE OR records made pursuant to the Freedom needs of the Congressional Research PRODUCTION OF RECORDS OR of Information Act (see 37 CFR 203.1 et Service, the Copyright Office, and the INFORMATION seq.) and the Privacy Act (see 37 CFR Law Library. 204.1 et seq.). Subpart A—Availability of Library of EFFECTIVE DATE: April 4, 2002. Congress Records § 703.2 Policy. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sec. (a) Subject to limitations set out in Elizabeth A. Pugh, General Counsel, 703.1 Purpose and scope of this subpart. this part, Library of Congress records Office of the General Counsel, Library of 703.2 Policy. shall be available as hereinafter Congress, Washington, DC 20540–1050. 703.3 Administration responsibilities. provided and shall be furnished as Telephone No. (202) 707–6316. 703.4 Definitions. promptly as possible within the Library 703.5 Records exempt from disclosure. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This to any member of the public at 703.6 Procedures for access to and copying Regulation sets forth the policy and of records. appropriate places and times and for an procedures of the Library of Congress 703.7 Public reading facility. appropriate fee, if any. regarding the testimony of employees 703.8 Fees and charges. (b) The Library shall not provide and former employees concerning Appendix A to Subpart A—Fees and Charges records from its files that originate in information acquired in the course of for Services Provided to Requestors of another federal agency or non-federal performing official duties or because of Record organization to persons who may not be the employee’s official relationship with Subpart B—testimony by Employees and entitled to obtain the records from the the Library of Congress, as witnesses in Production of Documents in Certain Legal originator. In such instances, the Library legal proceedings and the production or Proceedings Where the Library Is Not a shall refer requesters to the agency or disclosure of information contained in Party organization that originated the records. Library of Congress documents for use 703.15 Purpose and scope of this subpart. (c) In order to avoid disruption of in legal proceedings where the Library 703.16 Policy on presentation of testimony work in progress, and in the interests of is not a party, pursuant to a request, and production of documents. fairness to those who might be adversely order, or subpoena (collectively referred 703.17 Procedures when testimony and/or affected by the release of information to in this Regulation as a ‘‘demand’’). documents are demanded. which has not been fully reviewed to 703.18 Procedures when an employee’s A. This Regulation applies to: assure its accuracy and completeness, it appearance is demanded or documents is the policy of the Library not to (1) State court proceedings (including are demanded. grand jury proceedings); 703.19 Requests for authenticated copies of provide records which are part of on- (2) Federal court proceedings; and Library documents. going reviews or other current projects. (3) State and local legislative and 703.20 File copies. In response to such requests, the Library administrative proceedings. 703.21 Effect of this part. will inform the requester of the 703.22 Where to serve demands. B. This Regulation does not apply to: estimated completion date of the review (1) Matters that are not related to the Authority: 2 U.S.C. 136. or project so that the requester may then ask for the records. At that time, the Library of Congress but relate solely to Subpart A—Availability of Library of an employee’s personal dealings; Library may release the records unless Congress Records the same are exempt from disclosure as (2) Congressional demands for identified in § 703.5. testimony or documents; § 703.1 Purpose and scope of this subpart. (3) Any demand relating to activity (a) This subpart implements the § 703.3 Administration responsibilities. within the scope of Title 17 of the policy of the Library with respect to the The administration of this part shall United States Code (the Copyright Act public availability of Library of be the responsibility of the Chief, Office and related laws). These are governed Congress records. Although the Library Systems Services (OSS), Library of by Copyright Office regulations, which is not subject to the Freedom of Congress, 101 Independence Avenue, provide for different procedures and for Information Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. SE., Washington, DC 20540–9440, and service on the General Counsel of the 552), this subpart follows the spirit of to that end, the Chief may promulgate Copyright Office. See 37 CFR 201.1, sec. that Act consistent with the Library’s such supplemental rules or guidelines 203, sec. 204, and sec. 205. duties, functions, and responsibilities to as may be necessary. C. The purpose of this Regulation is the Congress. The application of that to ensure that employees’ official time is Act to the Library is not to be inferred, § 703.4 Definitions. used only for official purposes, to nor should this subpart be considered as (a) Records includes all books, papers, maintain the impartiality of the Library conferring on any member of the public maps, photographs, reports, and other of Congress among private litigants, to a right under that Act of access to or documentary materials, exclusive of ensure that public funds are not used for information from the records of the materials in the Library’s collections, private purposes, to ensure the Library. Nothing in this subpart regardless of physical form or protection of Congress’ interests, and to modifies current instructions and characteristics, made or received and establish centralized procedures for practices in the Library with respect to under the control of the Library in deciding whether or not to approve handling Congressional correspondence. pursuance of law or in connection with testimony or the production of (b) The Copyright Office, although a the transaction of public business, and documents. service unit of the Library, is by law (17 retained, or appropriate for retention, by U.S.C. 701) subject to the provisions of the Library as evidence of the List of Subjects in 36 CFR part 703 the Freedom of Information Act, as organization, functions, policies, Archives and records, Libraries. amended, only for purposes of actions decisions, procedures, operations, or
VerDate 11
other activities of the government or auditors, investigators, or examiners in resources, or facilities either on site or because of the informational value of the Office of the Inspector General. off site. This exemption includes: data contained therein. The term refers (4) Records specifically exempted (i) Reader Records. Library records only to such items in being and under from disclosure by statute, provided that which identify readers by name, such as the control of the Library. It does not such statute: registration records, reading room logs include the compiling or procuring of a (i) Requires that the matters be or registers, telephone inquiry logs, and record, nor does the term include withheld from the public in such a charge slips, if retained for objects or articles, such as furniture, manner as to leave no discretion on the administrative purposes. paintings, sculpture, three-dimensional issue, or (ii) Use Records. Users of the Library models, structures, vehicles, and (ii) Establishes particular criteria for are entitled to privacy with respect to equipment. withholding or refers to particular types their presence and use of the Library’s (b) Identifiable means a reasonably of matters to be withheld. facilities and resources. Records specific description of a particular (5) Records containing trade secrets pertaining to the use of the Library and record sought, such as the date of the and commercial or financial information of Library collections and subjects of record, subject matter, agency or person obtained from a person as privileged or inquiry are confidential and are not to involved, etc. which will permit confidential. This exemption may be disclosed either to other readers, to location or retrieval of the record. include, but is not limited to, business members of the staff who are not (c) Records available to the public sales statistics, inventories, customer authorized, or to other inquirers means records which may be examined lists, scientific or manufacturing including officials of law enforcement, or copied or of which copies may be processes or development information. intelligence, or investigative agencies, obtained, in accordance with this part, (6) Personnel and medical files and except pursuant to court order or by the public or representatives of the similar files the disclosure of which administratively by order of the press regardless of interest and without could constitute a clearly unwarranted Librarian of Congress. specific justification. invasion of personal privacy. This (c) Any reasonably segregable portion (d) Disclose or disclosure means exemption includes all private or of a record shall be provided to anyone making available for examination or personal information contained in files requesting such records after deletion of copying, or furnishing a copy. compiled to evaluate candidates for the portions which are exempt under (e) Person includes an individual, security clearances. this section. A portion of a record shall partnership, corporation, association, or (7) Materials and information be considered reasonably segregable public or private organization other than contained in investigative or other when segregation can produce an a federal agency. records compiled for law enforcement intelligible record which is not distorted purposes. out of context, does not contradict the § 703.5 Records exempt from disclosure. (8) Materials and information record being withheld, and can (a) The public disclosure of Library contained in files prepared in reasonably provide all relevant records provided for by this part does connection with government litigation information. not apply to records, or any parts and adjudicative proceedings, except for thereof, within any of the categories set those portions of such files which are § 703.6 Procedure for access to and out below. Unless precluded by law, the available by law to persons in litigation copying of records. Chief, OSS, nevertheless may release with the Library. (a) A request to inspect or obtain a records within these categories, except (9) Records having information copy of an identifiable record of the for Congressional correspondence and contained in or related to examination, Library of Congress shall be submitted other materials identified in operation, or condition reports prepared in writing to the Chief, OSS, Library of § 703.5(b)(1), after first consulting with by, on behalf of, or for the use of an Congress, 101 Independence Avenue, the General Counsel. agency responsible for the regulation or SE., Washington, DC 20540–9440, who (b) Records exempt from disclosure supervision of financial institutions. shall promptly record and process the under this part are the following: (10) Inter-agency or intra-agency request. (1) Congressional correspondence and memoranda, letters or other materials (b) Requests for records shall be other materials relating to work that are part of the deliberative process, specific and shall identify the precise performed in response to or in the premature disclosure of which records or materials that are desired by anticipation of Congressional requests, would inhibit internal communications name, date, number, or other identifying unless authorized for release by officials or be detrimental to a Library function data sufficient to allow the OSS staff to of the Congress. (e.g., case files in the Manuscript locate, retrieve, and prepare the record (2) Materials specifically authorized Division). for inspection or copying and to delete under criteria established by Executive (11) Records containing information exempted matter where appropriate to Order to be withheld from public customarily subject to protection as do so. Blanket or generalized requests disclosure in the interest of national privileged in a court or other (such as ‘‘all matters relating to’’ a defense or foreign policy and that are proceedings such as information general subject) shall not be honored properly classified pursuant to protected by the doctor-patient, attorney and shall be returned to the requester. Executive Orders. work product, or attorney-client (c) Records shall be available for (3) Records related solely to the privilege. inspection and copying in person internal personnel rules and practices of (12) Information submitted by a during business hours. the Library. This category includes, in person to the Library in confidence or (d) Records in media other than print addition to internal matters of personnel which the Library has obligated itself (e.g., microforms and machine-readable administration, internal rules and not to disclose such as information media) shall be available for inspection practices which cannot be disclosed received by the Office of the Inspector in the medium in which they exist. without prejudice to the effective General through its hotline. Copies of records in machine-readable performance of a Library function, such (13) Materials related to specific media shall be made in media as guidelines and procedures used by patron use of the Library’s collections, determined by the Chief, OSS.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16021
(e) Library staff shall respond to as the Library shall be closed to the deposited with the U.S. Treasury as requests with reasonable dispatch. Use public. miscellaneous receipts. of a record by the Library or Library (b) The General Counsel shall advise (e) The Chief, OSS, shall notify a employees, however, shall take the Chief, OSS, of the records to be requester and may require an advance precedence over any request. Under no available in the public reading facility deposit where the anticipated fees will circumstances shall official records be following consultation with the Library exceed $50. removed from Library control without managers who may be concerned. Appendix A to Part 703—Fees and the written authorization of the § 703.8 Fees and charges. Charges for Services Provided to Librarian. Requesters of Records (f) The Chief, OSS, shall make the (a) The Library will charge no fees for: initial determination on whether: (1) Access to or copies of records (a) Searches. under the provisions of this part when (1) The record described in a request (1) There is no charge for searches of the direct search and reproduction costs can be identified and located pursuant less than one hour. are less than $10. to a reasonable search, and (2) Fees charged for searches of one (2) Records requested which are not (2) The record (or portions thereof) hour or more are based on prevailing found or which are determined to be rates. Currently, those charges are: may be made available or withheld from exempt under the provisions of this disclosure under the provisions of this (i) Personnel searches (clerical): $15 part. per hour. part. In making the initial (3) Staff time spent in resolving any determinations, the Chief shall consult (ii) Personnel searches (professional): legal or policy questions pertaining to a $25 per hour. with any unit in the Library having a request. continuing substantial interest in the (iii) Reproduction costs: $.50 per (4) Copies of records, including those page. record requested. Where the Chief finds certified as true copies, that are no valid objection or doubt as to the (iv) Shipping and mailing fees: furnished for official use to any officer variable. propriety of making the requested or employee of the federal government. record available, the Chief shall honor (3) In situations involving the use of (5) Copies of pertinent records computers to locate and extract the the request upon payment of prescribed furnished to a party having a direct and fees, if any are required by § 703.8. requested information, charges will be immediate interest in a matter pending based on the direct cost to the Library, (g) If the Chief, OSS, determines that before the Library, when furnishing including labor, material, and computer a requested record should be withheld, such copies is necessary or desirable to time. the Chief shall inform the requester in the performance of a Library function. (b) Duplication of Records. Fees writing that the request has been (b) When the costs for services are $10 charged for the duplication of records denied; shall identify the material or more, the Chief, OSS, shall assess and shall be according to the prevailing rates withheld; and shall explain the basis for collect the fees and charges set out in established by the Library’s the denial. The Chief shall inform the appendix A to this part for the direct Photoduplication Service, or in the case requester that further consideration of costs of search and reproduction of of machine media duplication, by the the denied request may be obtained by records available to the public. Resources Management Staff, a letter to the General Counsel setting (c) The Chief, OSS, is authorized to Information Technology Services. out the basis for the belief that the waive fees and charges, in whole or in (c) Certifications. The fee charges for denial of the request was unwarranted. part, where it is determined that the certification of a record as authentic or (h) The General Counsel shall make public interest is best served to do so, a true copy shall be $10.00 for each the final determination on any request because waiver is likely to contribute certificate. for reconsideration and shall notify the significantly to public understanding of (d) Other Charges. When no specific requester in writing of that the operations or activities of the fee has been established for a service determination. The decision of the government and is not primarily in the required to meet the request for records, General Counsel shall be the final commercial interest of the requester. the Chief, OSS, shall establish an administrative review within the Persons seeking a waiver or reduction of appropriate fee based on direct costs in Library. fees may be required to submit a written accordance with the Office of (1) If the General Counsel’s decision statement setting forth the intended Management and Budget Circular No. reverses in whole or in part the initial purpose for which the records are A–25. determination by the Chief, OSS, the requested or otherwise indicate how Chief shall make the requested record, disclosure will primarily benefit the Subpart B—Testimony by Employees or parts thereof, available to the public and, in appropriate cases, and Production of Documents in requester, subject to the provisions of explain why the volume of records Certain Legal Proceedings Where the § 703.8. requested is necessary. Determinations Library Is Not a Party (2) If the General Counsel’s decision made pursuant to the authority set out sustains in whole or in part the initial herein are solely within the discretion § 703.15 Purpose and scope of this determination by the Chief, OSS, the of the Chief, OSS. subpart. General Counsel shall explain the basis (d) Fees and charges for services This subpart sets forth the policy and on which the record, or portions thereof, identified in the appendix to this part procedures of the Library of Congress will not be made available. shall be paid in full by the requester regarding, first, the testimony, as before the records are delivered. witnesses in legal proceedings where § 703.7 Public Reading Facility. Payment shall be made in U.S. funds by the Library is not a party, of employees (a) The Chief, OSS, shall maintain a personal check, money order, or bank and former employees concerning reading facility for the public inspection draft made payable to the Library of information acquired in the course of and copying of Library records. This Congress. The Chief, OSS, shall remit all performing official duties or because of facility shall be open to the public from fees collected to the Director, Financial the employee’s official relationship with 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., except Saturdays, Services, who shall cause the same to be the Library of Congress, and second, the Sundays, holidays, and such other times credited to appropriate accounts or production or disclosure of information
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16022 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
contained in Library of Congress the deliberative process privilege and has been made shall produce a copy of documents for use in legal proceedings the speech or debate clause, the need to this Part and shall respectfully refuse to where the Library is not a party, conserve the time of employees for provide any testimony or produce any pursuant to a request, order, or conducting official business, the need to documents. United States ex rel. Touhy subpoena (collectively referred to in this avoid spending the time and money of v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462 (1951). subpart as a ‘‘demand’’). the United States for private purposes, (c) The deciding official, as (a) This subpart applies to: the need to maintain impartiality among appropriate, will request the assistance (1) State court proceedings (including private litigants in cases where a of the Department of Justice or the U.S. grand jury proceedings); substantial government interest is not Attorney’s Office or congressional (2) Federal court proceedings; and involved, the established legal standards (3) State and local legislative and officials where necessary to represent for determining whether or not the interests of the Library, the administrative proceedings. justification exists for the disclosure of (b) This subpart does not apply to: Congress, and the employee in any of confidential information and records, the foregoing proceedings. (1) Matters that are not related to the and any other purpose that the deciding Library of Congress but relate solely to official deems to be in the interest of § 703.19 Requests for authenticated an employee’s personal dealings; Congress or the Library of Congress. copies of library documents. (2) Congressional demands for testimony or documents; § 703.17 Procedures when testimony and/ Requests for authenticated copies of (3) Any demand relating to activity or documents are demanded. Library documents for purposes of within the scope of Title 17 of the A demand for testimony and/or admissibility under 28 U.S.C. 1733 and United States Code (the Copyright Act documents by a Library employee must Rule 44 of the Federal Rules of Civil and related laws). These are governed be in writing, must state the nature of Procedure will be granted for by Copyright Office regulations, which the requested testimony and/or specify documents that would otherwise be provide for different procedures and for documents, and must meet the released pursuant to the Library’s service on the General Counsel of the requirements of § 703.15. A demand Regulations governing the release of Copyright Office. See 37 CFR 201.1, sec. must also show that the desired information. The advice of the 203, sec. 204, and sec. 205. testimony or document is not appropriate deciding official should be (c) The purpose of this subpart is to reasonably available from any other obtained concerning the proper form of ensure that employees’ official time is source and must show that no document authentication and information as to the used only for official purposes, to could be provided and used in lieu of proper person having custody of the maintain the impartiality of the Library testimony. When an employee of the record. of Congress among private litigants, to Library receives such a request the ensure that public funds are not used for employee will immediately forward it, § 703.20 File copies. private purposes, to ensure the with the recommendation of the The Office of the General Counsel will protection of Congress’ interests, and to employee’s supervisors, to the maintain the official file of copies of all establish centralized procedures for appropriate deciding official under demands served on the Library and deciding whether or not to approve § 703.22 of this part. The deciding deciding officials’ responses. testimony or the production of official, in consultation with the documents. appropriate offices of the Library or § 703.21 Effect of this part. congressional offices, will determine § 703.16 Policy on presentation of This part is intended only to provide testimony and production of documents. whether or not compliance with the guidance for the internal operations of request would be appropriate and will No Library of Congress employee may the Library of Congress and is not respond as soon as practicable. provide testimony or produce intended to, and does not, and may not, documents in any proceeding to which § 703.18 Procedures when an employee’s be relied upon to create any right or this part applies concerning information appearance is demanded or documents are benefit, substantive or procedural, acquired in the course of performing demanded. enforceable at law by a party against the official duties or because of the (a) If the deciding official has not Library of Congress or the United States. employee’s official relationship with the acted by the return date on a subpoena, § 703.22 Where to serve demands. Library of Congress, unless authorized the employee must appear at the stated by the General Counsel or his/her time and place (unless advised by the Requesting parties must serve designee, or the Director of the deciding official that the subpoena was subpoenas: Congressional Research Service (CRS) not validly issued or served or that the (a) For Congressional Research with respect to records and testimony subpoena has been withdrawn) and Service matters: Director, Congressional relating to CRS’s work for Congress, or inform the court (or other interested Research Service, LM 203, Library of the Law Librarian for records and parties) that the demand has been or is Congress, Washington, DC 20540. testimony relating to the Law Library’s being, as the case may be, referred for work for Congress or materials prepared the prompt consideration of the (b) For Law Library matters: Law for other federal agencies covered by appropriate Library or congressional Librarian, LM 240, Library of Congress, evidentiary privileges. The officials and shall respectfully request Washington, DC 20540. aforementioned officials (hereinafter the court (or other authority) to stay the (c) For all other matters: General ‘‘deciding officials’’) will consider and demand pending receipt of the Counsel, LM 601, Library of Congress, act upon demands under this part with requested instructions. Washington, DC 20540. due regard for the interests of Congress, (b) If the deciding official has denied Dated: March 11, 2002. where appropriate, statutory approval to comply with the subpoena, requirements, the Library’s interests, and the court or authority rules that the James H. Billington, and the public interest, taking into demand must be complied with The Librarian of Congress. account factors such as applicable irrespective of such a denial, the [FR Doc. 02–7865 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] privileges and immunities, including employee upon whom such a demand BILLING CODE 1410–04–P
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16023
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS (014)’’, ‘‘Director of the Administrative requiring periodic reports to agency AFFAIRS Service (014)’’, or ‘‘Director of heads and Congress on their activities. Administrative Service (014)’’ to read Section 2 of the Act specifically 38 CFR Chapter I ‘‘Director, Management and provided that the Inspector General RIN 2900–AL15 Administration (01E)’’. shall audit all programs and operations [FR Doc. 02–8120 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] of the Postal Service. With the creation of the independent postal inspector Board of Veterans’ Appeals Title BILLING CODE 8320–01–P Change general, representatives of the Inspection Service and the Office of AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. Inspector General met to work out the ACTION: Final rule. POSTAL SERVICE transition of selected functions from the Inspection Service to the Office of SUMMARY: The Board of Veterans’ 39 CFR Parts 224, 229, 233, 266, 273 Inspector General. After several Appeals (Board) adjudicates appeals negotiation sessions, the two parties from denials of claims for veterans’ Transfer of Functions From the Postal agreed to a formal designation of benefits filed with the Department of Inspection Service to the Inspector functions. As a result, certain activities Veterans Affairs (VA). This document General formerly performed by the Inspection amends VA regulations to reflect that Service were now to be performed by the ‘‘Director of Administrative Service AGENCY: Postal Service. the Office of Inspector General. (014)’’ at the Board has been changed to ACTION: Final Rule. References in Title 39 of the Code of the ‘‘Director, Management and Federal Regulations citing the Administration (01E)’’. SUMMARY: The Postal Service is Inspection Service as the party DATES: Effective Date: April 4, 2002. amending the Code of Federal Regulations to reflect the role the responsible for a variety of audit and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Inspector General plays in the audit, oversight duties became outdated. This Steven L. Keller, Senior Deputy Vice investigative, and oversight activity of revision removes incorrect references to Chairman (012), Board of Veterans’ the Postal Service. This is the first the Inspector Service and the Chief Appeals, Department of Veterans comprehensive revision of the Postal Postal Inspector and inserts very limited Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Service Inspector General regulations additional text. A new Part 230, Washington, DC 20420 (202–565–5978). since the independent postal Inspector Responsibilities of the Office of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final General came into existence in 1997. Inspector General, which will outline rule merely concerns agency The intent of this revision is to remove the duties of the Inspector General, will management. Accordingly, we are outdated references to the Inspection be published separately. dispensing with prior notice and Service’s duties that are now the List of Subjects comment and delayed effective date responsibility of the Office of Inspector provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553. General. 39 CFR Part 224 Paperwork Reduction Act DATES: Effective April 4, 2002. Organization and functions (Government agencies). This document contains no provisions FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: constituting a collection of information Andrea Bernardo, Managing Counsel, 39 CFR Part 229 under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 Legal Services, Office of Inspector Organization and functions U.S.C. 3501–3520). General, 703–248–4676. (Government agencies). Regulatory Flexibility Act SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The primary responsibility of the Office of 39 CFR Part 233 The Secretary of Veterans Affairs Inspector General is to conduct audits Administrative practice and hereby certifies that this final rule will and investigations to prevent, detect, not have a significant economic impact procedure, Crime, Law enforcement, and report fraud, waste, abuse, and Penalties, Privacy. on a substantial number of small entities mismanagement; to promote efficiency as they are defined in the Regulatory in the programs and operations of the 39 CFR Part 266 Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, since Postal Service; and to provide oversight Privacy. this final rule does not contain any of the Inspection Service. The 1996 substantive provisions. Therefore, amendments to the Inspector General 39 CFR Part 273 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this final Act (Act) created an independent rule is exempt from the regulatory Administrative practice and inspector general for the Postal Service. procedure, Claims, Fraud, Penalties. flexibility analysis requirements of The responsibility of serving as the sections 603 and 604. For the reasons stated in the inspector general was removed from the preamble, the Postal Service amends 39 There is no Catalog of Federal Domestic Chief Postal Inspector. The basic CFR as follows: Assistance number for this final rule. purpose of the Act was to strengthen Approved: March 25, 2002. audit and investigative activities in PART 224—ORGANIZATIONS Anthony J. Principi, order to obtain greater efficiency and REPORTING DIRECTLY TO THE Secretary of Veterans Affairs. effectiveness in federal government POSTMASTER GENERAL operations. This purpose was to be For the reasons set out in the achieved by consolidating audit and A. Part 224 is amended as follows: preamble, under 38 U.S.C. 501, 38 CFR investigative units under a single 1. The authority citation for part 224 chapter 1 is amended as set forth below: individual reporting directly to the continues to read as follows: CHAPTER I—DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS agency head; providing protections Authority: 39 U.S.C. 203, 204, 401(2), 403, AFFAIRS designed to ensure that the new offices 404, 409, 1001; Inspector General Act of In chapter I, revise all references to had independence and authority to 1978, as amended (Pub. L. No. 95–452, as ‘‘Director, Administrative Service carry out their responsibilities; and by amended), 5 U.S.C. App. 3.
VerDate 11
§ 224.3 [Amended] employed or residing therein. Service by General came into existence in 1997. 2. Section 224.3 is amended as mail is complete upon mailing. The intent of this revision is to clarify follows: the responsibilities and duties of the a. Paragraph (a) is revised; PART 266—PRIVACY OF Inspector General for postal customers b. Paragraph (b)(6) is removed, and INFORMATION and employees. paragraphs(b) (7) and (8) are redesigned D. Part 266 is amended as follows: DATES: Effective April 4, 2002. as (b)(6) and (7) respectively. 1. The authority citation for part 266 c. Paragraph (c) is revised; continues to read as follows: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: d. Paragraph (d) is removed. Andrea Bernardo, Managing Counsel, Authority: 39 U.S.C. 401; 5 U.S.C. 552a. The revisions read as follows: Legal Services, Office of Inspector * * * * * § 266.6 [Amended] General, 703–248–4676. (a) The Postal Inspection Service is 2. Section 266.6(a)(1) is amended by SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The headed by the Chief Postal Inspector adding the following after ‘‘268–2608.’’: who also acts as the Chief Security primary responsibility of the Office of * * * * * Inspector General is to conduct audits Officer and Defense Coordinator for the (a)***(1)*** Requests submitted to and investigations to prevent, detect, Postal Service. the Office of Inspector General should * * * * * be submitted to the Freedom of and report fraud, waste, abuse, and (c) The Inspection Service through the Information Act/Privacy Officer, Office mismanagement; to promote efficiency Chief Postal Inspector shall promptly of Inspector General, 1735 North Lynn in the programs and operations of the report to the Inspector General the Street, Arlington, Virginia, 22209–2020. Postal Service, and to provide oversight significant activities being carried out *** of the Inspection Service. by the Inspection Service and on all The 1996 amendments to the other matters as required by law. PART 273—ADMINISTRATION OF Inspector General Act (Act) created an PROGRAM FRAUD CIVIL REMEDIES § 224.4 [Amended] independent inspector general for the ACT Postal Service. The responsibility of 6. In sections 224.4(b)(1) and (2), E. Part 273 is amended as follows: serving as the inspector general was remove the reference to ‘‘§ 224.3(d)’’ removed from the Chief Postal each place it appears and add in its 1. The authority citation for part 273 Inspector. The basic purpose of the Act place ‘‘§ 230.1(c)’’. continues to read as follows: Authority: 31 U.S.C. Chapter 38; 39 U.S.C. was to strengthen audit and PART 229—FIELD ORGANIZATIONS 401. investigative activities in order to obtain 2. Section 273. 2 (c) is revised to read greater efficiency and effectiveness in B. Part 229 is amended as follows: as follows: federal government operations. This 1. The authority citation for part 229 purpose was to be achieved by continues to read as follows: § 273.2 Definitions. consolidating audit and investigative Authority: 39 U.S.C. 401, 402, 403, and * * * * * units under a single individual 404. (c) Investigating Official refers to the reporting directly to the agency head; Inspector General of the Postal Service § 229.2 [Amended] providing protections designed to or any designee within the United States ensure that the new offices had 2. In § 229.2(b)(1), remove ‘‘auditing,’’ Office of the Inspector General who independence and authority to carry out serves in a position for which the rate their responsibilities; and by requiring PART 233—INSPECTION SERVICE of basic pay is not less than the periodic reports to agency heads and AUTHORITY minimum rate of basic pay for grade Congress on their activities. GS–16 under the General Schedule. C. Part 233 is amended as follows: * * * * * Section 2 of the Act specifically 1. The authority citation for part 233 provided that the Inspector General continues to read as follows: Stanley F. Mires, shall audit all programs and operations Authority: 39 U.S.C. 101, 102, 202, 204, Chief Counsel, Legislative. of the Postal Service. With the creation 401, 402, 403, 404, 406, 410, 411, 1003, [FR Doc. 02–8105 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] of the independent postal inspector 3005(e)(1); 12 U.S.C. 3401–3422; 18 U.S.C. BILLING CODE 7710–12–P general, representatives of the 981, 1956, 1957, 2254, 3061; 21 U.S.C. 881; Inspection Service and the Office of Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1996, sec. 662 (Pub. L. N0. 104–208). Inspector General met to work out the POSTAL SERVICE transition of selected functions from the 2. The heading for Part 233 is revised Inspection Service to the Office of 39 CFR Part 230 to read as set forth above. Inspector General. After several § 233.1 [Amended] Responsibilities of the Office of negotiation sessions, the two parties 3. In § 233.1 paragraph (c) is revised Inspector General agreed to a formal designation of and in paragraph (d) the words ‘‘or functions. As a result, certain activities AGENCY: Postal Service. audit’’ are removed. The revision to formerly performed by the Inspection ACTION: paragraph (c) reads as follows: Final rule. Service were now to be performed by * * * * * SUMMARY: The Postal Service is the Office of Inspector General. (c) Administrative subpoenas may be amending the Code of Federal References in Title 39 of Code of Federal served by delivering a copy to a person Regulations to reflect the role the Regulations citing the Inspection or by mailing a copy to his or her last Inspector General plays in the audit, Service as the party responsible for a known address. For the purposes of this investigative, and oversight activity of variety of audit and oversight duties provision, delivery of a copy includes the Postal Service. This is the first became outdated. This situation has handing it to the party or leaving it at comprehensive revision of the Postal been thoroughly addressed in this the party’s office or residence with a Service Inspector General regulations revision. The inaccurate references to person of suitable age and discretion since the independent postal Inspector the Inspector Service and the Chief
VerDate 11
Postal Inspector have been corrected. A such officers and employees that the or information to the Office of Inspector new Part 230, relating to the Office of Inspector General deems necessary and General that leads to any audit, review, Inspector General, is hereby created. appropriate to fulfill the mission of the or investigation). Office. In addition, the Inspector List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 230 General may delegate to such officers § 230.4 Arrest and investigative powers of criminal investigators. Freedom of information, Organization and employees of the Inspector General functions and authority delegations, such powers, duties, and Under the authority of 18 U.S.C. 3061, Privacy. responsibilities, as the Inspector General criminal investigators employed by the For the reasons stated in the deems necessary and appropriate for the Office of Inspector General are preamble, the Postal Service amends 39 proper functioning of the Office. authorized to perform the following CFR by adding the following new part (g) All employees in the Office of functions in connection with their 230, as follows: Inspector General shall take and official duties: subscribe to the oath of office required (1) Serve warrants and subpoenas PART 230—OFFICE OF INSPECTOR of all Postal Service employees under 39 issued under the authority of the United GENERAL U.S.C. 1011, and the Inspector General, States; or designee, is authorized to administer (2) Make arrests without warrant for Sec. offenses against the United States 230.1 Establishment and authority. such oath and affirmation. (h) The Inspector General has the committed in their presence; 230.2 Access to information and other (3) Make arrests without warrant for responsibilities. authority to enter into contracts or other 230.3 Cooperation with the Office of arrangements with public agencies and felonies cognizable under the laws of Inspector General. with private entities, and to make such the United States if they have 230.4 Arrest and investigative powers of payments as may be necessary to carry reasonable grounds to believe that the criminal investigators. out the duties and responsibilities of the person to be arrested has committed or 230.5 Release of information. Office of Inspector General. is committing such a felony; Authority: Inspector General Act of 1978, (i) The Inspector General may hire (4) Carry firearms; and as amended (Pub. L. 95–452, as amended), 5 and retain the services of expert (5) Make seizures of property as U.S.C. App. 3; 39 U.S.C. 401(2). consultants and other personnel as provided by law. § 230.1 Establishment and authority. necessary to fulfill the duties and § 230.5 Release of information. responsibilities of the Office. (a) The Office of Inspector General is (a) There is established, pursuant to (j) Except as required by law, the the Inspector General Act of 1978, as responsible for maintaining and storing Governors may not transfer to the its own records and for assuring amended (5 U.S.C. App.3), and 39 Inspector General responsibility for U.S.C. 410, an independent Office of compliance with applicable records performing any of the program activities management, retention, and disclosure Inspector General. of the Postal Service. (b) The Inspector General reports requirements. directly to the nine presidentially § 230. 2 Access to information and other (b) The Inspector General or a appointed Governors and shall not be responsibilities. designee serves as the official custodian supervised by, nor report to, the (a) The Inspector General has of the records and documents of the Postmaster General and/or any designee authority to have access to all postal Office of Inspector General and is appointed by the Postmaster General. records, reports, audits, reviews, responsible for administering the rules (c) The Office of Inspector General documents, papers, information, and and regulations relating to public includes an Inspector General, an other material relating to any matter availability of Postal Service Office of Assistant Inspector General for Audit, related to the responsibilities of the Inspector General records insofar as the and an Assistant Inspector General for Inspector General; information is subject to the provisions Investigations. The Office of Inspector (b) The Inspector General shall be the of the Freedom of Information Act, General maintains its own legal counsel Investigating Official for purposes of the contained in Section 552 of Title 5 of independent of the Postal Service Law Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act. the U.S. Code and 39 U.S.C. 410 (c), Department for matters that are within and/or the Privacy Act, Section 552a of the jurisdiction of the Office. § 230.3 Cooperation with the Office of Title 5 of the U.S. Code. (d) The Office of Inspector General is Inspector General. (c) Requests for records and responsible for detecting and preventing (a) All Postal Service employees shall information under the Freedom of fraud, waste, and abuse in the programs cooperate with all audits, reviews, and Information Act or Privacy Act should and operations of the Postal Service, investigations conducted by the Office be submitted in writing to the Office of and for reviewing existing and proposed of Inspector General. Deliberately Inspector General, Freedom of legislation and regulations relating to submitting information known to be Information/Privacy Act Officer, located the programs and operations of the false or misleading to the Office of at 1735 N. Lynn Street, Arlington, Postal Service. Inspector General or failing to cooperate Virginia, 22209–2020. (e) The Inspector General has with all audits, reviews, and (d) The Office of Inspector General oversight responsibilities for all investigations conducted by the Office shall comply with and adhere to the activities of the Postal Inspection of Inspector General may be grounds for procedures governing the release of Service. The Chief Postal Inspector must disciplinary or other legal action. information maintained by the U.S. promptly report to the Inspector General (b) Any employee who has authority Postal Service as set forth in Part 265 significant activities and other to take, direct another to take, and related provisions of these information related to the Inspection recommend or approve any personnel regulations to the extent such Service as required by law. action shall not retaliate against any procedures do not conflict with any (f) The Inspector General has sole employee as a reprisal for cooperating provision in this part. responsibility for directing the Office of and assisting with any Office of (e) Appeals from the denial of any Inspector General, including the Inspector General audit, review, or request for information should be authority to select, appoint, and employ investigation (including reporting facts directed to the General Counsel for the
VerDate 11
Office of Inspector General, who is ACTION: Final rule. Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington responsible for deciding any timely DC 20460. appeals authorized under this section. SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing approval of California Air Resources Board, Stationary (f) Postal Service records in the a revision to the San Joaquin Valley Source Division, Rule Evaluation Section, custody of the Office of Inspector Unified Air Pollution Control District 1001 ‘‘I’’ Street, Sacramento, CA 95814. General that contain proprietary (SJVUAPCD) portion of the California San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution information will not be released by the State Implementation Plan (SIP). This Control District, 1990 East Gettysburg Inspector General without consultation action was proposed in the Federal Street, Fresno, CA 93726. with the appropriate Postal Service Register on December 31, 2001 and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al official responsible for the record. concerns PM–10 emissions from Petersen, Rulemaking Office (AIR–4), Stanley F. Mires, industrial processes. Under authority of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Chief Counsel, Legislative. the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 Region IX; (415) 947–4118. (CAA or the Act) this action approves a [FR Doc. 02–8104 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] local rule that regulates this emission SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BILLING CODE 7710–12–P source. Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION May 6, 2002. I. Proposed Action AGENCY ADDRESSES: You can inspect a copy of On December 31, 2001 (66 FR 67497), 40 CFR Part 52 the administrative record for this action EPA proposed to approve the following at EPA’s Region IX office during normal [CA 071–0335; FRL–7164–6] rule into the California SIP. business hours. You can inspect a copy Revisions to the California State of the submitted rule revision at the Implementation Plan, San Joaquin following locations: Valley Unified Air Pollution Control Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, District 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. AGENCY: Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency, Air Agency (EPA). Docket (6102), Ariel Rios Building, 1200
TABLE 1.—SUBMITTED RULE
Local agency Rule # Rule title Adopted Submitted
SJVUAPCD ...... 4201 Particulate Matter Concentration ...... 12/17/92 11/18/93
We proposed to approve this rule state law. Accordingly, the Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, because we determined that it complied Administrator certifies that this rule August 10, 1999). This action merely with the relevant CAA requirements. will not have a significant economic approves a state rule implementing a Our proposed action contains more impact on a substantial number of small Federal standard, and does not alter the information on the rule and our entities under the Regulatory Flexibility relationship or the distribution of power evaluation. Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this and responsibilities established in the II. Public Comment and EPA Response rule approves pre-existing requirements CAA. This rule also is not subject to under state law and does not impose Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of EPA’s proposed action provided a 30- any additional enforceable duty beyond day public comment period. During this Children from Environmental Health that required by state law, it does not Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, period, we did not receive any contain any unfunded mandate or comments. April 23, 1997), because it is not significantly or uniquely affect small economically significant. III. EPA Action governments, as described in the In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s As authorized in sections 110(k)(3) Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). role is to approve state choices, and 301(a) of the CAA, EPA is fully provided that they meet the criteria of approving the submitted rule into the This rule also does not have tribal the CAA. In this context, in the absence California SIP. implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more of a prior existing requirement for the IV. Administrative Requirements Indian tribes, on the relationship State to use voluntary consensus Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR between the Federal Government and standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is Indian tribes, or on the distribution of to disapprove a SIP submission for not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and power and responsibilities between the failure to use VCS. It would thus be therefore is not subject to review by the Federal Government and Indian tribes, inconsistent with applicable law for Office of Management and Budget. For as specified by Executive Order 13175 EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, this reason, this action is also not (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This to use VCS in place of a SIP submission subject to Executive Order 13211, action also does not have Federalism that otherwise satisfies the provisions of ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That implications because it does not have the CAA. Thus, the requirements of Significantly Affect Energy Supply, substantial direct effects on the States, section 12(d) of the National Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May on the relationship between the national Technology Transfer and Advancement 22, 2001). This action merely approves government and the States, or on the Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not state law as meeting federal distribution of power and apply. This rule does not impose an requirements and imposes no additional responsibilities among the various information collection burden under the requirements beyond those imposed by levels of government, as specified in
VerDate 11
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction (C) * * * SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). (5) Rule 4201, adopted on December The Congressional Review Act, 5 17, 1992. I. General Information U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small * * * * * A. Does this Action Apply to Me? Business Regulatory Enforcement [FR Doc. 02–8062 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] You may be affected by this action if Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides BILLING CODE 6560–50–P you are an agricultural producer, food that before a rule may take effect, the manufacturer, or pesticide agency promulgating the rule must manufacturer. Potentially affected submit a rule report, which includes a ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION categories and entities may include, but copy of the rule, to each House of the AGENCY are not limited to: Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a 40 CFR Part 180 Cat- NAICS Examples of Poten- report containing this rule and other [OPP–2002–0010; FRL–6833–3] egories tially Affected Entities required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and RIN 2070–AB78 Industry 111 Crop production the Comptroller General of the United 112 Animal production Revocation of Certain Obsolete States prior to publication of the rule in 311 Food manufacturing Tolerance Exemptions 32532 Pesticide manufac- the Federal Register. A major rule turing cannot take effect until 60 days after it AGENCY: Environmental Protection is published in the Federal Register. Agency (EPA). This listing is not intended to be This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as ACTION: Direct Final rule. exhaustive, but rather provides a guide defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). for readers regarding entities likely to be Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, SUMMARY: EPA is amending 40 CFR part affected by this action. Other types of petitions for judicial review of this 180 subpart D to revoke various entities not listed in the table could also action must be filed in the United States exemptions from the requirement of a be affected. The North American Court of Appeals for the appropriate tolerance for eight specific inert Industrial Classification System circuit by June 3, 2002. Filing a petition ingredients because those substances are (NAICS) codes have been provided to for reconsideration by the Administrator no longer used in pesticide products, assist you and others in determining of this final rule does not affect the making these tolerance exemptions whether or not this action might apply finality of this rule for the purposes of unnecessary. The Agency is acting on its to certain entities. If you have questions judicial review nor does it extend the own initiative. These regulatory actions regarding the applicability of this action time within which a petition for judicial are part of the tolerance reassessment to a particular entity, consult the person review may be filed, and shall not requirements of section 408(q) of the listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION postpone the effectiveness of such rule Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act CONTACT. or action. This action may not be (FFDCA), as amended by the Food challenged later in proceedings to Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996. B. How Can I Get Additional enforce its requirements. (See section By law, EPA is required to reassess 66% Information, Including Copies of this 307(b)(2).) of the tolerances in existence on August Document and Other Related 2, 1996, by August 2002, or about 6,400 Documents? List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 tolerances. This regulatory action will 1. Electronically.You may obtain Environmental protection, Air count for 10 tolerance reassessments electronic copies of this document, and pollution control, Incorporation by toward the August 2002 deadline. certain other related documents that reference, Intergovernmental relations, DATES: This rule is effective on August might be available electronically, from Particulate matter, Reporting and 2, 2002 without further notice, unless the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// recordkeeping requirements. EPA receives adverse comment by June www.epa.gov/. To access this Dated: March 13, 2002. 3, 2002. If EPA receives adverse document, on the Home Page select Laura Yoshii, comment, EPA will publish a timely ‘‘Laws and Regulations’’,‘‘ Regulations withdrawal in the Federal Register Deputy Regional Administrator, Region IX. and Proposed Rules, ’’ and then look up informing the public that this rule will the entry for this document under the ‘‘ Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code not take effect. of Federal Regulations is amended as Federal Register—Environmental ADDRESSES: Comments may be follows: Documents. ’’ You can also go directly submitted by mail, electronically, or in to the Federal Register listings at http:/ PART 52—[AMENDED] person. Please follow the detailed /www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. A frequently instructions for each method as updated electronic version of 40 CFR 1. The authority citation for Part 52 provided in Unit I.C. of the part 180 is available at http:// continues to read as follows: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. It is www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. imperative that you identify docket cfrhtml_00/Title _40/40cfr180_00.html, control number OPP–2002–0010 in the a beta site currently under development. Subpart F—California subject line on the first page of your 2. In person. The Agency has response. 2. Section 52.220 is amended by established an official record for this adding paragraph (c)(194)(i)(C)(5) to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: action under docket control number read as follows: Treva C. Alston, Registration Division OPP–2002–0010. The official record 7505C], Office of Pesticide Programs, consists of the documents specifically § 52.220 Identification of plan. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 referenced in this action, and other * * * * * Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, information related to this action, (c) * * * DC 20460; telephone number: (703) including any information claimed as (194) * * * 308–8373; e-mail address: Confidential Business Information (CBI). (i) * * * [email protected]. This official record includes the
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16028 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
documents that are physically located in D. How Should I Handle CBI that I Want pesticide chemicals in or on raw the docket, as well as the documents to Submit to the Agency? agricultural commodities and processed that are referenced in those documents. Do not submit any information foods. Without a tolerance or tolerance The public version of the official record electronically that you consider to be exemption, food containing pesticide does not include any information CBI. You may claim information that residues is considered to be unsafe and claimed as CBI. The public version of you submit to EPA in response to this therefore ‘‘adulterated’’ under section the official record, which includes document as CBI by marking any part or 402(a) of the FFDCA. If food containing printed, paper versions of any electronic all of that information as CBI. pesticide residues is found to be comments submitted during an Information so marked will not be adulterated, the food may not be applicable comment period is available disclosed except in accordance with distributed in interstate commerce (21 for inspection in the Public Information procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. U.S.C. 331(a) and 342 (a)). and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), In addition to one complete version of B. Why is EPA Issuing this as a Direct Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson the comment that includes any Final Rule? Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, from 8:30 information claimed as CBI, a copy of a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, the comment that does not contain the EPA is issuing this action as a direct excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB information claimed as CBI must be final rule without prior proposal telephone number is (703) 305–5805. submitted for inclusion in the public because the Agency believes that this C. How and to Whom Do I Submit version of the official record. action is not controversial and is not Comments? Information not marked confidential likely to result in any adverse will be included in the public version comments. This action removes various You may submit comments through of the official record without prior exemptions from the requirement of a the mail, in person, or electronically. To notice. If you have any questions about tolerance for eight specific inert ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, ingredients because those substances are imperative that you identify docket please consult the person listed under no longer used in pesticide products. control number OPP–2002–0010 in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. These tolerance exemptions are subject line on the first page of your unnecessary. E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare response. EPA also encourages you to This rule is effective on August 2, My Comments for EPA? submit your comments electronically, if 2002 without further notice, unless EPA at all possible, which will facilitate You may find the following receives adverse comment by June 3, timely receipt by the Agency and avoid suggestions helpful for preparing your 2002. If, however, EPA receives a potential delays associated with the comments: relevant adverse comment during the processing of government mail. 1. Explain your views as clearly as comment period, then EPA will publish 1. By mail. Submit your comments to: possible. a timely withdrawal in the Federal Public Information and Records 2. Describe any assumptions that you Register informing the public that the Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Information used. rule will not take effect. EPA will also Resources and Services Division 3. Provide copies of any technical publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs information and/or data you used that in a future edition of the Federal (OPP), Environmental Protection support your views. Register. EPA will address the Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 4. If you estimate potential burden or comments on the direct final rule as part Washington, DC 20460. costs, explain how you arrived at the of that proposed rulemaking. 2. In person or by courier. Deliver estimate that you provide. your comments to: Public Information 5. Provide specific examples to III. Background and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), illustrate your concerns. A. What Action is the Agency Taking? Information Resources and Services 6. Offer alternative ways to improve Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide the proposed rule or collection activity. In Federal Register Notices of Programs (OPP), Environmental 7. Make sure to submit your November 22, 1989, (54 FR 58314) and Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal comments by the deadline in this June 24, 1998, (63 FR 34384)(FRL– Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., document. 5792–3) the Agency removed certain Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, chemicals from its list of pesticide 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through be sure to identify the docket control product inert ingredients that were no Friday, excluding legal holidays. The number assigned to this action in the longer used as inert ingredients in PIRIB telephone number is (703) 305– subject line on the first page of your registered pesticide products. At that 5805. response. You may also provide the time, the Agency indicated that future 3. Electronically. You may submit name, date, and Federal Register use of these chemcials as inert your comments electronically by e-mail citation. ingredients in pesticide products would to: [email protected], or you can II. Authority not be permitted unless a petitioner or submit a computer disk as described registrant satisfied all data requirements above. Do not submit any information A. What is the Agency’s Authority for as identified by the Agency, and the electronically that you consider to be Taking this Action? Agency was able to make a CBI. Avoid the use of special characters This direct final rule is issued determination that the use of the inert and any form of encryption. Electronic pursuant to section 408(e) of FFDCA, as ingrediuent will not pose unreasonable submissions will be accepted in amended by the FQPA (21 U.S.C. risk to human health or the WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII file 346a(e)). Section 408 of FFDCA environment. format. All comments in electronic form authorizes the establishment of On its own initiative, the Agency is must be identified by docket control tolerances, exemptions from the amending 40 CFR 180.1001, 180.1014, number OPP–2002–0010. Electronic requirement of a tolerance, and 180.1046 by revoking exemptions comments may also be filed online at modifications in tolerances, and from the requirement of a tolerance for many Federal Depository Libraries. revocation of tolerances for residues of eight inert ingredients that are no longer
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16029
used in pesticide products applied to accordance with good commercial Order 13045, entitled Protection of food and feed commodities. practice as an adjuvant in liquid grain Children from Environmental Health fumigants for the fumigation of the Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, B. Which Tolerance Exemptions are following grains; barley, corn, oats, April 23, 1997), or Executive Order Being Removed? popcorn, rice, rye, sorghum (milo), 13211, entitled Actions Concerning 1. On November 22, 1989, (54 FR wheat. Regulations That Significantly Affect 58314) the Agency removed benzene v. There are two exemptions from the Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 and formaldehyde from its list of requirement of a tolerance for FR 28355, May 22, 2001). chemicals currently used in pesticide dimethylformamide. In 40 CFR This direct final rule directly products. These substances, both of 180.1001(d), the exemption is for use as regulates food processors, food which were initially classified as List 1 a solvent and cosolvent with its use handlers, and food retailers, but does inert ingredients, were determined to no limited to preemergence application not affect States, local or Tribal longer be in use as pesticide product prior to formation of edible parts of food governments directly. This action does inert ingredients and were therefore plants, and seed and transplant not alter the relationships or removed from all lists of inert treatment, and also as part of the U.S. distribution of power and ingredients. The exemptions from the Department of Agriculture witchweed responsibilities established by Congress requirement of a tolerance for the inert quarantine program, postemergent in the preemption provisions of FFDCA ingredient uses of benzene and application in field corn, after silking section 408(n)(4). This action will not formaldehyde are now being revoked. and tasseling of the corn. The second have substantial direct effects on State i. In 40 CFR 180.1001(d), there is an exemption from the requirement of a or tribal governments, on the exemption from the requirement of a tolerance exists in 40 CFR 180.1046 for relationship between the Federal tolerance for benzene. This exemption is dimethylformamide for the following government and States or Indian tribes, for its use as a solvent and cosolvent. two uses: or on the distribution of power and ii. An exemption from the a. When used in accordance with responsibilities between the Federal requirement of a tolerance for good agricultural practices in government and States or Indian tribes. formaldehyde exists in 40 CFR formulations with the fungicide triforine As a result, this action does not require 180.1001(d). This exemption is limited (N,N-[1,4-piperazinediylbis(2,2,2,- any action under Executive Order to not more than 1% of the pesticide trichloroethylidene)] bis [formamide]) if 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR formulation with a prescribed use as a such formulations contain not more 43255, August 10, 1999), or under preservative for the formulation. than 30 percent dimethylformamide in Executive Order 13175, entitled 2. On June 24, 1998, (63 FR 34384) or on the following raw agricultural Consultation and Coordination with EPA removed certain chemicals from its commodities: almonds, apples, apricots, Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR list of pesticide product inert bell peppers, blueberries, cantaloupes, 67249, November 6, 2000). Nor does it ingredients that are not currently used cherries, cranberries, cucumbers, impose any enforceable duty or contain in pesticide products. Included among eggplants, hops, nectarines, peaches, any unfunded mandate as described those removed inert ingredients were plums, prunes (fresh), strawberries, and under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates six substances for which exemptions watermelons. Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public from the requirement of a tolerance b. When used by the U.S. Department Law 104–4). existed for their use as inert ingredients of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service as Nor does it require special and for which the tolerance exemptions a solvent for the lamprecide sodium salt considerations under Executive Order are now being revoked. of alpha, alpha, alpha-trifluoro-4-nitro- 12898, entitled Federal Actions to i. In 40 CFR 180.1001(d) there are meta-cresol or 4-nitro-3- Address Environmental Justice in exemptions from the requirement of a (trifluoromethyl) phenol in the Great Minority Populations and Low-Income tolerance for coal (derived only from Lakes. anthracite and bituminous coals) and Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, coke (from anthracite and bituminous C. What is the Contribution to Tolerance 1994); or Executive Order 12630, coals only and petroleum). These two Reassessment? entitled Governmental Actions and tolerance exemptions are limited to soil Section 408(q) of FFDCA, as amended Interference with Constitutionally application and are for use as carriers by FQPA requires EPA to reassess 66% Protected Property Rights (53 FR 8859, and extenders. or about 6,400 of the tolerances in March 15, 1988). ii. An exemption from the existence on August 2, 1996, by August This action does not involve any requirement of a tolerance for dioxane is 2002. This direct final rule revokes 10 technical standards that would require in 40 CFR 180.1001(d) for dioxane for tolerance exemptions. Therefore, if there Agency consideration of voluntary use as a solvent and cosolvent. In the are no adverse comments, 120 days after consensus standards pursuant to section above cited Federal Register Notice, the publication of the direct final rule, 10 12(d) of the National Technology Agency removed dioxane from its list of tolerance reassessments will be counted Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 pesticide product inert ingredients that toward the August 2002 deadline. (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section are currently used in pesticide products. 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). iii. There are two tolerance IV. Regulatory Assessment Under section 605(b) of the exemptions for methylene chloride Requirements Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 (dichloromethane) for use as a solvent EPA is removing 10 tolerance U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency hereby currently in 40 CFR 180.1001(d) and (e). exemptions that are no longer necessary. certifies that these revocations will not The exemption in 40 CFR 180.1001(d) is Since this direct final rule does not have significant negative economic for a use as a solvent and co-solvent. impose any new requirements, it is not impact on a substantial number of small The use in 40 CFR180.1001(e) is as a subject to review by the Office of entities. The rationale supporting this dispersing and wetting agent. Management and Budget (OMB) under conclusion is as follows. These iv. In 40 CFR 180.1014 there is an Executive Order 12866, entitled chemical substances are no longer used exemption from the requirement of a Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR in pesticide products applied to food tolerance for pentane when used in 51735, October 4, 1993), Executive and feed commodities. These
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16030 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
exemptions from the requirement for a FEDERAL EMERGENCY in the third column. As of that date, tolerance are no longer necessary. MANAGEMENT AGENCY flood insurance will no longer be available in the community. However, VIII. Submission to Congress and the 44 CFR Part 64 some of these communities may adopt Comptroller General [Docket No. FEMA–7781] and submit the required documentation The Congressional Review Act, 5 of legally enforceable floodplain U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Suspension of Community Eligibility management measures after this rule is Business Regulatory Enforcement published but prior to the actual AGENCY: Federal Emergency Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides suspension date. These communities Management Agency, FEMA. that before a rule may take effect, the will not be suspended and will continue agency promulgating the rule must ACTION: Final rule. their eligibility for the sale of insurance. submit a rule report, which includes a A notice withdrawing the suspension of SUMMARY: This rule identifies the communities will be published in copy of the rule, to each House of the communities, where the sale of flood Congress and to the Comptroller General the Federal Register. insurance has been authorized under In addition, the Federal Emergency of the United States. EPA will submit a the National Flood Insurance Program report containing this rule and other Management Agency has identified the (NFIP), that are suspended on the special flood hazard areas in these required information to the U.S. Senate, effective dates listed within this rule the U.S. House of Representatives, and communities by publishing a Flood because of noncompliance with the Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The date of the Comptroller General of the United floodplain management requirements of States prior to publication of this final the FIRM if one has been published, is the program. If the Federal Emergency indicated in the fourth column of the rule in the Federal Register. This final Management Agency (FEMA) receives rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by table. No direct Federal financial documentation that the community has assistance (except assistance pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 804(2). adopted the required floodplain the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 management measures prior to the and Emergency Assistance Act not in effective suspension date given in this connection with a flood) may legally be Environmental protection, rule, the suspension will be withdrawn provided for construction or acquisition Administrative practice and procedure, by publication in the Federal Register. of buildings in the identified special Agricultural commodities, Pesticides EFFECTIVE DATES: The effective date of flood hazard area of communities not and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping each community’s suspension is the participating in the NFIP and identified requirements. third date (‘‘Susp.’’) listed in the third for more than a year, on the Federal Dated: March 28, 2002. column of the following tables. Emergency Management Agency’s Peter Caulkins, ADDRESSES: If you wish to determine initial flood insurance map of the Acting Director, Registration Division, Office whether a particular community was community as having flood-prone areas of Pesticide Programs. suspended on the suspension date, (section 202(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is contact the appropriate FEMA Regional Office or the NFIP servicing contractor. 4106(a), as amended). This prohibition amended as follows: against certain types of Federal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: assistance becomes effective for the PART 180—[AMENDED] Edward Pasterick, Division Director, communities listed on the date shown Program Marketing and Partnership in the last column. The Associate 1. The authority citation for part 180 Division, Federal Insurance Director finds that notice and public continues to read as follows: Administration and Mitigation comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are Directorate, 500 C Street, SW.; Room Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346(a) and impracticable and unnecessary because 411, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646– 374. communities listed in this final rule 3098. § 180.1001 [Amended] have been adequately notified. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP Each community receives a 6-month, 2. In § 180.1001 by: enables property owners to purchase 90-day, and 30-day notification flood insurance which is generally not i. Removing from the table in addressed to the Chief Executive Officer otherwise available. In return, paragraph (d) the entries for ‘‘benzene’’, that the community will be suspended communities agree to adopt and ‘‘coal (derived only from anthracite and unless the required floodplain administer local floodplain management bituminous coals)’’, ‘‘coke (from management measures are met prior to aimed at protecting lives and new anthracite and bituminous coals only the effective suspension date. Since construction from future flooding. and petroleum)’’, these notifications have been made, this Section 1315 of the National Flood ‘‘dimethylformamide’’, ‘‘dioxane’’, final rule may take effect within less Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 ‘‘formaldehyde’’, and ‘‘methylene than 30 days. U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance chloride (dichloromethane)’’. National Environmental Policy Act. coverage as authorized under the This rule is categorically excluded from ii. Removing from the table in National Flood Insurance Program, 42 the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, paragraph (e) the entry for ‘‘methylene U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; unless an Environmental Considerations. No chloride’’. appropriate public body adopts environmental impact assessment has § 180.1014 [Removed] adequate floodplain management been prepared. measures with effective enforcement Regulatory Flexibility Act. The 3. By removing § 180.1014. measures. The communities listed in Associate Director has determined that § 180.1046 [Removed] this document no longer meet that this rule is exempt from the statutory requirement for compliance requirements of the Regulatory 4. By removing § 180.1046 with program regulations, 44 CFR part Flexibility Act because the National [FR Doc. 02 –8154 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] 59 et seq. Accordingly, the communities Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as BILLING CODE 6560–50–S will be suspended on the effective date amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits
VerDate 11
flood insurance coverage unless an Paperwork Reduction Act. This rule Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is appropriate public body adopts does not involve any collection of amended as follows: adequate floodplain management information for purposes of the measures with effective enforcement Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. PART 64—[AMENDED] measures. The communities listed no 3501 et seq. longer comply with the statutory Executive Order 12612, Federalism. 1. The authority citation for Part 64 requirements, and after the effective This rule involves no policies that have continues to read as follows: date, flood insurance will no longer be federalism implications under Executive Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; available in the communities unless Order 12612, Federalism, October 26, Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 1987, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp.; p. 252. they take remedial action. 1978 Comp.; p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice 3 CFR, 1979 Comp.; p. 376. Regulatory Classification. This final Reform. This rule meets the applicable rule is not a significant regulatory action standards of section 2(b)(2) of Executive § 64.6 [Amended] under the criteria of section 3(f) of Order 12778, October 25, 1991, 56 FR Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 55195, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp.; p. 309. 2. The tables published under the 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, authority of § 64.6 are amended as List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64 58 FR 51735. follows: Flood insurance, Floodplains.
Date certain Federal assist- Community Effective date authorization/cancellation of sale of flood in- Current ef- ance no longer State and location No. surance in community fective map available in date special flood hazard areas
Region II: New York: Port Jervis, City of, 360976 December 26, 1973 Emerg.; June 1, 1978, Reg. April 2, 4/2/02 4/2/02 Orange County. 2002 Region III: Pennsylvania: Langhorne, Bor- 421074 January 24, 1975, Emerg.; July 2, 1980, Reg. April 2, 2002 -do- -do- ough of, Bucks County. Region I: Connecticut: Chesire, Town of, 090074 March 13, 1975, Emerg.; July 16, 1981, Reg. April 15, 4/15/02 4/15/02 New Haven County. 2002 Southington, Town of, Hartford 090037 July 3, 1975, Emerg.; July 16, 1981, Reg. April 15, 2002 -do- -do- County. Region II: New Jersey: Madison, Bor- 340347 December 3, 1971, Emerg.; July 16, 1979, Reg. April 15, -do- -do- ough of, Morris County. 2002 New York: Kiryas Joel, Village 361610 August 31, 1994, Emerg.; April 15, 2002 -do- -do- of, Orange County. Region IV Florida: South Daytona, City 120314 June 18, 1971, Emerg.; October 3, 1976, Reg. April 15, -do- -do- of, Volusia County. 2002 Tennessee: Selmer, City of 470132 February 14, 1975, Emerg.; June 4, 1987, Reg. April 15, -do- -do- McNairy County. 2002 Region VI: Texas: Jonestown, City of, 481597 January 29, 1976, Emerg.; April 1, 1982, Reg. April 15, -do- -do- Travis County. 2002 Lago Vista, City of, Travis 481588 January 29, 1976, Emerg.; April 1, 1982, Reg. April 15, -do- -do- County. 2002 Lakeway, City of, Travis Coun- 481303 June 27, 1977, Emerg.; November 5, 1980, Reg. April 15, -do- -do- ty. 2002 Travis County, Unincorporated 481026 January 29, 1976, Emerg.; April 1, 1982, Reg. April 15, -do- -do- Areas. 2002 Region X: Idaho: Oregon: Warm Springs 410291 August 11, 1997, Emerg.; April 15, 2002 -do- -do- Indian Reservation. Code for reading third column: Emerg.—Emergency; Reg.—Regular; Susp.—Suspension.
VerDate 11
Dated: March 25, 2002. raised by employee organizations, conditions. In addition, FRA found that Robert F. Shea, congressional members, and adherence to the servicing programs was Acting Administrator, Federal Insurance recommendations of the National uneven throughout the industry, and Administration and Mitigation Transportation Safety Board concerning that poor servicing was often the Administration. working conditions in locomotive cabs. primary cause of unsanitary facilities. [FR Doc. 02–7881 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] In this legislation, Congress issued The Report also explained that there BILLING CODE 6718–05–P mandates concerning locomotive was disparity in the legal treatment of crashworthiness and cab working locomotive cab sanitation among state conditions. Section 10 of RSERA, and federal regulatory and enforcement DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION entitled Locomotive Crashworthiness bodies and confusion existed among and Working Conditions, required FRA industry members concerning Federal Railroad Administration ‘‘to consider prescribing regulations to applicable standards and guidelines. improve the safety and working See NPRM, 66 FR 136–7. 49 CFR Part 229 conditions of locomotive cabs’ The Report concluded that, given the throughout the railroad industry. In significant role that servicing and use [Docket No. FRA 2000–8545, Notice No. 3] order to determine whether regulations play in maintaining a sanitary workplace and the relative ease with RIN 2130–AA89 would be necessary, Congress asked FRA to which servicing and use may be Locomotive Cab Sanitation Standards modified, the issue of locomotive assess the extent to which environmental, sanitation could best be resolved AGENCY: Federal Railroad sanitary and other working conditions in through rail management and labor Administration (FRA), Department of locomotive cabs affect productivity, health and the safe operation of locomotives. cooperation. Transportation (DOT). Following publication of the Report, In response to Section 10 of RSERA, ACTION: Final rule. FRA continued to receive employee FRA studied a variety of working complaints about the state of sanitation SUMMARY: FRA amends its regulations conditions in locomotive cabs, in locomotive cabs, and the health and by adding standards that address toilet including sanitation, noise, temperature, safety risks associated with working in and washing facilities for employees air quality, ergonomics, and vibration. an unsanitary area. FRA also received who work in locomotive cabs. This rule In September 1996, FRA submitted its complaints from employees of one provides exceptions for certain existing Locomotive Crashworthiness and Cab railroad concerning the disposal method equipment and operations, and Working Conditions Report (‘‘Report’’) used in a particular sanitation system. establishes servicing requirements. to Congress, which describes the results By design, this system requires DATES: This final rule will become of these studies. The Report is available temporary storage of untreated waste in effective on June 3, 2002. for review in the docket of this matter sealed waste containers, which gave rise and was discussed in detail in FRA’s to perceived health and safety concerns. ADDRESSES: Any petition for Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) There were also concerns about the reconsideration should reference FRA on Locomotive Cab Sanitation expansion of this system as the Docket No. FRA 2000–8545, Notice No. Standards. See, 66 FR 136, January 2, railroad’s territory increased, the 3, and be submitted to the Department 2001. increase of ‘‘power sharing’’ of Transportation Central Docket In short, FRA surveyed in excess of arrangements among the carriers, and Management Facility located in Room 200 locomotives to assess cab sanitation the administrative difficulties that PL–401 at the Plaza level of the Nassif facilities. FRA found a wide range of would arise in maintaining and mixing Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., conditions, which varied due to different systems. Finally, some State Washington, DC 20590. All docket weather, type of sanitation system in agencies expressed frustration with FRA material related to this proceeding will place, carrier maintenance and service concerning federal preemption of be available for inspection at this programs, locomotive model, and certain state sanitation regulations, and address and on the Internet at http:// economic status of the railroad. In the uneven treatment given locomotive dms.dot.gov. Docket hours at Nassif are addition, some locomotives were not sanitation by the state and federal Monday–Friday, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., equipped with sanitation facilities. FRA courts. except on federal holidays. found dirty floors and toilet seats, In light of these concerns, FRA FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lou missing toilet seats, poor ventilation, determined that cab sanitation must be Klein, Office of Safety Assurance and offensive odors, and lack of toilet paper. revisited and addressed so that cab Compliance, Federal Railroad In very cold weather, some units tend to employees would have access to Administration, 1120 Vermont Avenue, freeze and become inoperable. Of the adequate sanitary facilities, and to NW., Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC cabs surveyed, approximately thirty ensure uniform application of the law. 20590, (telephone: 202–493–6235); or percent were deficient in some manner Despite the considerable acrimony that Christine Beyer, Office of Chief Counsel, related to the use of sanitation facilities. had developed in the industry Federal Railroad Administration, 1120 The Report noted that employees and surrounding this issue, FRA remained Vermont Avenue, NW., Mail Stop 10, rail management play a role in the convinced that it should be addressed Washington, DC 20590, (telephone: condition of sanitary facilities; poor cooperatively, with the assistance of the 202–493–6027). sanitary conditions aboard locomotives stakeholders who possess the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: are caused by inadequate maintenance knowledge and expertise to resolve the and/or heavy use or misuse by operating problem effectively. Therefore, on June I. Background crews. Nearly all railroads had programs 24, 1997, FRA presented the subject of In 1992, Congress enacted Section 10 in place to service toilet and washing locomotive cab working conditions, of The Rail Safety Enforcement and units, although the program including sanitation, to the Railroad Review Act (RSERA) (Pub. L. 102–365, requirements vary from property to Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC). September 3, 1992, codified at 49 U.S.C. property depending on degree of use, RSAC was formed by FRA in March 20103, note) in response to concerns toilet system in place, and weather 1996 to provide a forum for consensual
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16033
rulemaking and program development. warranted by an assessment of the its member organizations reviewed the The Committee includes representation available information, including the NPRM, they identified an issue from all of the agency’s major customer FRA survey of sanitary facilities and concerning commuter work trains that is groups, including railroads, labor complaint information. The Working not addressed in the NPRM. Commuter organizations, suppliers, manufacturers, Group met several times for over a railroads and their contractors use work and other interested parties. FRA period of nearly two years to discuss trains to maintain the right-of-way along typically assigns a task to RSAC, and locomotive cab sanitation in the railroad their routes, and typically use older after consideration and debate, RSAC industry. The discussions covered all locomotives that are not equipped with may accept or reject the task. If aspects of sanitation facilities in the sanitary facilities to power these work accepted, RSAC establishes a working locomotive cab, including toilet trains. The operation of these trains is group that possesses the appropriate systems, washing facilities, potable very similar to switching, transfer, and expertise and representation to develop water, ventilation, lighting, trash some Class III service, in which recommendations to FRA for action on disposal, provisions for toilet paper and employees are not captive in the cab for the task. These recommendations are bottled water, servicing, and unique an entire work shift, and have access to developed by consensus. If a working operations or characteristics that might toilet facilities along the right-of-way. group comes to consensus on require specialized regulatory treatment. APTA states in its comments that all of recommendations for action, the The Working Group reached the commuter railroads that own and package is presented to the full RSAC consensus on a series of maintain their rights-of-way provide for a vote. If the proposal is accepted by recommendations for a proposed alternate access to sanitation facilities if a simple majority of the RSAC, the sanitation standard, referred them to the the locomotives are not equipped with proposal is formally recommended to full RSAC, and RSAC approved them on toilets. There are a variety of methods FRA. If the working group is unable to December 7, 2000. On January 2, 2001, used to accomplish access: portable reach consensus on recommendations FRA published the NPRM, which toilets are placed at the work site; for action, FRA may, as necessary, move incorporated many of the Working cabooses with toilet facilities are ahead to resolve the issue through Group’s recommendations. FRA held a attached to the work train; crews are traditional rulemaking proceedings. public hearing on April 2, 2001, to provided with keys to passenger station When FRA presented the subject of gather comments from interested facilities; portable toilets are placed on locomotive cab working conditions to parties, and then reconvened the flat cars and attached to the work train; RSAC, the agency stated the purpose of Working Group on August 22, 2001. The a passenger coach equipped with the task as follows: to safeguard the Working Group considered all facilities is attached to the work train; health of locomotive crews and to comments received, and again reached and highway vehicles are provided to promote the safe operation of trains. consensus on recommendations for a shuttle employees to the nearest facility. RSAC accepted this task, formed a final standard. These recommendations The basis for the exceptions provided Locomotive Cab Working Conditions were presented to the full RSAC and on in the NPRM for switching, transfer Working Group (‘‘Working Group’’), and December 10, 2001, RSAC voted by service and Class III service is that designated this assignment Task No. 97– simple majority to forward the employees must be given adequate 2. As to sanitation, RSAC asked the recommendations to FRA as the basis access to sanitation facilities, even Working Group to for a final sanitation standard. though the locomotive on which they The discussion that follows outlines work is not equipped with a toilet. research comparable workplace requirements the nature of each comment, the Retrofitting locomotive cabs with new in an effort to develop minimum acceptable regulations, guidelines, or standards as Working Group’s recommendation for toilet facilities is extremely costly and appropriate for the locomotive cab addressing the comment, and how FRA labor-intensive. Therefore, the Working environment. resolves the comment in this final rule. Group recommended that FRA provide an exception in the final rule to address The Working Group consists of II. Summary of Comments and commuter work trains in which the representatives of the following Conclusions Reached organizations, in addition to FRA: locomotives are not equipped with toilet FRA received comments to the cab facilities, so long as the employees are American Association of State Highway sanitation NPRM from approximately 13 given appropriate access to facilities. & Transportation Officials organizations and individuals, and these FRA agrees that such an exception is American Public Transportation are available to the public for review in appropriate. Association DOT’s electronic docket (http:// APTA also requested a new definition American Short Line and Regional dms.dot.gov). Some of the commenters for the final rule to properly identify the Railroad Association expressed appreciation that the subject trains covered by this exception: a non- Association of American Railroads of locomotive sanitation would now be revenue service train used in the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers addressed by a federal standard, many administration and upkeep of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way expressed broad support for the basic railroad. The proposed definition is very Employes (Nonvoting Member) principles and approach taken in the similar to one published in the revised International Brotherhood of Electrical NPRM, and some of the commenters power brake rule (See, 49 CFR Workers raised issues they believe are not 232.407(a)(4)), except that it does not National Railroad Passenger Corporation addressed appropriately in the proposed include a reference to the train’s (Amtrak) standard. Some of these are not difficult tonnage. The issue of tonnage has no Railway Progress Institute to cure, and some will require bearing on access to sanitation facilities, Sheet Metal Workers’ International additional investigation. and therefore, FRA concurs that there is Association The American Public Transportation no reason to include this in the new Transport Workers Union of America Association (APTA) has been a member definition. However, FRA believes the United Transportation Union. of the Working Group, participated in definition should be clarified to indicate The Working Group’s goal was to developing recommendations for the that only commuter work trains are produce recommendations for NPRM, and is generally supportive of covered by the exception. The Working locomotive cab sanitation standards the proposed standard. However, when Group and FRA did not contemplate
VerDate 11
such an exception for freight railroads, FRA should clarify in this document these commenters and the final standard whose facilities are often much more that this sanitation standard does not addresses their concerns. dispersed geographically; and therefore, apply to non-general system railroads. The Legislative Board of Arizona of the definition and exception as they This sanitation standard will become the Brotherhood of Locomotive appear in the final rule apply only to part of the locomotive safety standards, Engineers (BLE) submitted a comment commuter work trains. Section 49 CFR part 229. Section 229.3 states concerning the juxtaposition of difficult 137(b)(1)(i) of the final rule now that the locomotive standards do not working conditions resulting from poor includes commuter work trains in the apply to ‘‘a railroad that operates only sanitation facilities and the difficult exception that previously applied only on track inside an installation which is working conditions that result when to commuter service. not a part of the general system of cabs in the Southwest are not air The National Railroad Passenger transportation * * *’’ As used here, the conditioned. The Arizona BLE states Corporation (Amtrak) participated in the phrase ‘‘on track inside an installation’’ that most engineers would prefer to Working Group meetings and submitted includes entities such as tourist, scenic, work in an air conditioned unit during comments to the docket following historic and excursion railroads. the summer months, so long as the publication of the NPRM. Amtrak Therefore, if these railroads operate only consist includes one locomotive with initially raised three issues in need of within installations that are not part of operating, sanitary facilities. If given a attention, but subsequently notified the general system of transportation, choice, engineers would most often FRA that its concerns regarding two of they are not covered by part 229 and work in an air conditioned locomotive the issues were no longer significant. will not be covered by the sanitation without a proper sanitation facility, so However, Amtrak noted that the standard. This is true regardless of long as one locomotive in the consist definition for ‘‘switching service’’ in the whether the railroad is insular or not; possessed appropriate facilities. The NPRM did not include passenger insularity is not an issue in part 229. Arizona BLE suggests that the crew operations, as it traditionally has in (See, e.g., 49 CFR 234.3(c).) should have the discretion to determine The Tourist Railroad Association other regulations and in practice. FRA if a noncompliant, air conditioned unit (TRAIN) is a member of the full RSAC and the Working Group agreed that the would be taken out of the lead position Committee and represents NPRM was in error, and the definition in favor of a non-air conditioned unit approximately 300 tourist railroads and of ‘‘switching service’’ now includes that possesses a compliant sanitation railroad museums. TRAIN submitted passenger, as well as, freight operations. facility. In the course of the Working Group comments to the NPRM which suggest discussions in August 2001, Amtrak one minor change to the rule text. The Working Group and FRA raised concerns about cab cars used in TRAIN states that their members may grappled with this issue in discussions push-pull in which the lead unit may not be ‘‘carriers’’ pursuant to certain prior to and following publication of the not be equipped with toilet facilities in federal law, and therefore that term NPRM. The choice would be a difficult a few areas of the country. This practice should be removed from the exception one to make and cannot be resolved in is restricted to very few cars and the that relates to tourist railroads, the context of this rulemaking employees working on these trains have § 229.137(b)(1)(v). As used here, of procedure. FRA cannot issue a final access to facilities in the passenger course, ‘‘carrier’’ has the meaning sanitation standard that includes coaches of the train. In addition, cars conveyed by the railroad safety laws requirements concerning air that do not possess toilets are decreasing ( See, 49 U.S.C. 20102) which clearly conditioning, because it would exceed in the Amtrak system, and will not be cover tourist operations. Nevertheless, the scope of this rulemaking as replaced with unequipped units. The to avoid any implication with regard to established in the NPRM. Even traditional Amtrak locomotives and cab other statutes, FRA has omitted the assuming FRA could address air cars are equipped with compliant toilet word ‘‘carrier’’ from the rule. The rule conditioning in this final rule, a very facilities for the cab crew. Amtrak text now states that employees must complicated list of considerations requested and the Working Group have access to ‘‘railroad-provided would have to be reviewed in order to recommended that FRA insert a narrow sanitation facilities,’’ rather than determine which locomotive should be exception in the rule text to permit ‘‘railroad carrier-provided facilities’’ as placed in the lead position. A highly Amtrak to run these cab cars so long as stated in the NPRM. subjective hierarchy of ‘‘palatable’’ employees have adequate access to Two individual locomotive engineers working conditions would have to be sanitation facilities in the passenger submitted comments to the NPRM. Mr. devised; the age, condition and power of coaches of the train or at passenger P.R. Wilcox, Local Chairman of the each locomotive would have to be stations along the route. FRA agrees Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers assessed in relation to the load carried; that, given the limited circumstances in Division 848, wrote to underscore the power sharing arrangements between which these cars are used in the lead unsanitary conditions that are present the major carriers would have to be position and that the employees have on many locomotives and to encourage examined to prevent interruptions in access to facilities elsewhere, a narrow FRA and the Working Group to service; and weather conditions and exception is appropriate. Therefore, complete the task with a final standard. geography would have to be anticipated. FRA adds a new exception in this final Mr. E.M. Hendricks, an engineer in This sort of ‘‘consist management’’ rule, in § 229.137(b)(1)(vi). Tucson, Arizona, also stated that the requirement, though desirable, is The Association of Railway Museums conditions are at times egregious and extremely difficult to contrive on a (ARM) is a member of the full RSAC that a federal regulation is necessary to national basis given the enormity of Committee, representing tourist, scenic, correct these problems. Mr. Hendricks variation among railroads, operations, historic and excursion railroads. ARM believes that lack of proper servicing is regions, and personal preferences across commented on the NPRM and supports typically the problem and that the industry. FRA will continue to seek the approach it takes, particularly with sanitation facilities should be added to methods to minimize safety and health respect to tourist railroads. However, the locomotive daily inspection so that hazards for cab employees with the ARM notes that some of its members do employees in the lead locomotive begin assistance of the Working Group, but the not operate on the general system of their shift with sanitary facilities. FRA issue of cab temperature cannot be railroad transportation and suggests that and the Working Group concur with addressed in this final standard.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16035
The United Transportation Union service, not in freight railroading. The Finally, the AAR notes that the system (UTU) participated in all of the Working proposal and the final rule provide an has been improved over time. The AAR Group discussions and made a exception for commuter service so that believes that the chemical configuration statement at the public hearing. The § 229.137(c) will never come into play and delivery methods used to process UTU stated that the Working Group where push-pull service is used. waste have been improved for efficiency worked hard to reach appropriate FRA stated in the NPRM that it would and safety in handling. Also, more solutions for existing problems consider reducing the 10-day period efficient flushing designs have been concerning sanitation and the the during which a railroad can use a developed to lower water and chlorine NPRM, if adopted as a final rule, would defective toilet in switching or transfer consumption and increase capacity. improve the level of safety in the service to reflect common practice FRA asked commenters to consider industry. The UTU encouraged FRA to (§ 229.139(d)). The AAR argues in its the need for explicit servicing move forward with a final standard. comments that shortening this 10-day requirements for the Microphor, which The Association of American period would not provide the railroads might include following the Railroads (AAR) participated in the with sufficient time to repair defective manufacturer’s recommended Working Group discussions, submitted units, and as written in the NPRM, maintenance plan or periodically testing comments to the NPRM, and took part would provide no health benefit the effluent to determine whether the in the public hearing. The AAR’s because employees must be given access treatment process is working properly. comments respond to requests for input to facilities during the 10-day period. In its written comments, the AAR stated that FRA issued in the NPRM. First, Based on this information, the fact that that these changes are not necessary FRA invited comment on the policy of the Working Group consented to this because the carriers follow specific permitting locomotives with defective time period, and an absence of evidence maintenance programs that suit local toilets to be used as trailing units in a that the 10-day period is excessive or conditions and the system has not train or in other limited circumstances. harmful, FRA has retained this resulted in any known injuries or The AAR supports this proposal, stating provision in § 229.139(d) of the final illnesses. that the condition of toilets in trailing rule. Following the Working Group units is not relevant so long as the lead, Finally, the AAR responded to FRA’s meeting in August 2001, the AAR occupied unit possesses a compliant request for information on the reconsidered its view that testing the unit. Microphor toilet system. This system discharge was not necessary. Based on FRA asked whether two types of has been used pervasively throughout persistent complaints from labor sanitation systems currently in use, the the industry for at least twenty years, organizations that the Microphor often dry hopper and the bogan, which must and several questions concerning its discharged untreated waste along the be phased out pursuant to the new rule, maintenance and operation surfaced right-of-way, the railroads agreed to are used pervasively throughout the during the Working Group discussions conduct testing under a variety of industry. The AAR states that these and in comments to the NPRM. The operational conditions. The initial systems are isolated to the two carriers Microphor is a biological treatment testing indicated that some units the Working Group and FRA were aware system in which waste is flushed into a perform as intended, but some of when preparing the NPRM. FRA was chamber where biological agents reduce apparently do not. According to the concerned that the temporary exception the waste to harmless by-product. Then AAR, the testing results revealed proposed in the NPRM for continued the by-product is chemically treated to inconsistencies in the operation of the use of these systems, although they do neutralize the biological agent, and the Microphor system, which may be due to not comply with the new definition of solution is slowly released into the design changes, maintenance, usage, or ‘‘toilet facility,’’ would be more atmosphere. When working properly, other factors. In September 2001, the widespread than anticipated when the the effluent is clear liquid, or liquid AAR notified FRA that certain freight exception was proposed. As is with small amounts of inert material and passenger carriers and the explained in greater detail below, each dissolved or suspended in it. The U.S. manufacturer developed a test plan to of these systems is being phased out Food and Drug Administration (FDA) validate the effectiveness of the over time and replaced with compliant has statutory authority to regulate the Microphor system. The test plan would toilets. disposal of human waste in interstate begin in the fall of 2001 and continue FRA also asked for assistance in transportation, and has issued standards for approximately three months. Under clarifying § 229.137(c), which permits that prohibit disposing untreated waste the test plan, the carriers would gather use of a lead unit with a defective toilet and permit discharging waste that has usage patterns and operating conditions, when several conditions exist that make been treated to prevent disease. See 21 such as weather, across the industry, it impossible to move the train without CFR part 1250. In 1973, the FDA and then subject a large number of the use of that locomotive. FRA thought that examined the Microphor system toilets to these ‘‘real world’’ conditions. the language of the exception might be pursuant to its authority and The AAR will consult with FRA when refined to appear less complicated. The determined that it meets the standard if the test results have been gathered. AAR notes that the carriers will rely on operating as intended. The Brotherhood of Maintenance-of- this section rarely, but that the need for The AAR stated in its comments and Way Employes (BMWE) and the the exception is inevitable on occasion. at the public hearing that more than one Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen The AAR concurs that the proposal thousand Microphor systems are in use (BRS) submitted written comments and accurately captures all conditions that in the industry today. The AAR is not participated in the public hearing of this must be present in order to take aware of any injury or illness caused by matter. Both organizations are members advantage of the exception and that the use of the Microphor system. In of the full RSAC, and the BMWE is a shortening or refining the language in addition, the AAR states that the non-voting member of the Working § 229.137(c) is not possible. Microphor flushes and processes waste Group. These organizations represent FRA also asked for comment on how without exposing employees to contact railroad employees who work along the § 229.137(c) would affect push-pull with the waste or chemicals. The system railroad right-of-way and are directly operations. The AAR states that push- works on water, air pressure, and impacted by discharge from the pull service is used only in commuter chlorine; no electricity is needed. Microphor system.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16036 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
The BRS and the BMWE assert that for cab employees, who are often during a typical week, and toilet the discharge is often untreated or required to be present in the cab for 8 systems might vary significantly on each poorly treated waste, which exposes or more hours. If the railroads took all of these occasions. The time it takes to employees to the risk of illness or, at the of these locomotives out of service, the complete a particular route might vary very least, a highly unpleasant work industry and the economy it generates greatly from day-to-day, due to traffic, environment. The organizations state could not function. load, and weather conditions. Small that waste treatment in the Microphor is However, FRA has added language to operators typically possess older time-dependent, and suggest that waste the rule text in § 229.139 to more fully equipment, and some units may not be is not always in contact with the describe the conditions that must be equipped with toilet facilities at all. On chlorine for a sufficient length of time. present in order for the toilet to be these properties, employees may This problem may arise when very ‘‘operating as intended.’’ FRA and the generally have access to adequate frequent flushing occurs, when the Working Group believe that this change sanitation facilities along the right-of- chlorine concentration has diminished from the NPRM will help to resolve way, but there may be occasions when substantially, when the flushing some of the issues surrounding the that is difficult to achieve. mechanism lacks sufficient water, or Microphor and the composition of its As FRA discussed in the NPRM, there when the bowl is clogged. In addition, discharge. are significant economic and the BRS and BMWE state that the FRA has been testing the Microphor operational barriers to requiring a ‘‘one- manufacturer’s design changes over the system and its discharge at selected size-fits-all’’ sanitation standard, given last twenty years have reduced the locations during the last several months, all of these factors, and consequently efficiency of the treatment process. and plans to do additional testing. Thus FRA has made every effort in this Both organizations urge the FRA to far, FRA has not collected enough data proceeding to be flexible. The basic prohibit any discharge from the on which to draw reliable conclusions requirement set forth in the rule is that Microphor system along the right-of- concerning the system and its ability to each cab employee should have access way until more information has been treat human waste prior to discharge. to clean, operable toilet facilities, as the gathered to determine the nature of the When FRA has completed the testing, need arises for each individual. There discharge. If FRA chooses not to FRA will consult with the industry may be instances where that basic prohibit discharge (as is the case in the concerning any questions or principle is frustrated, but FRA believes final rule), they urge FRA to require the conclusions reached, and to compare the rule minimizes that likelihood to the railroads to engage in an active testing results with the tests completed by the fullest extent possible. program to ensure that the system and AAR member organizations. Further, Definitions maintenance plan are working properly. FRA will consult with the FDA to The BRS also suggested that the determine what actions that agency The final rule provides definitions for railroads install holding tanks beneath deems appropriate under its current key terms used in this amendment, and the Microphor that would hold any rules or through further rulemaking. At these will be placed in § 229.5 with the discharge until the locomotive is at a that point, FRA will be in a better other definitions established for part location where the waste can be position to determine whether the FRA 229. The definitions are set forth emptied into a larger container or sanitation standard should address the alphabetically. treatment process. The BRS and BMWE characteristics of the effluent. For the terms ‘‘commuter service’’, representatives on the full RSAC The Working Group was asked to ‘‘other short-haul passenger service’’, Committee did not concur with the address sanitation facilities for ‘‘switching service’’, and ‘‘transfer Working Group’s recommendation to locomotive cab employees and worked service’’, please see the detailed the full RSAC that FRA publish a final tirelessly for three years to develop discussion of the exceptions to the rule substantially consistent with the workable solutions that cab employees general requirements, discussed in NPRM. Instead, these organizations and rail management can support. FRA conjunction with § 229.137(b) below. voted to send the work product back to believes it is very important to publish FRA has defined the term ‘‘commuter the Working Group for further analysis. the standard now to correct ongoing service’’ to track the agency’s definition FRA agrees with the BRS and BMWE problems that affect cab employees, to in 49 CFR part 209, Appendix A. FRA that this issue is serious and in need of hasten the retirement of older systems, has added a definition of ‘‘other short- investigation and analysis. However, and to remedy the uneven state and haul passenger service’’ to track the FRA has determined that the final rule federal treatment of this issue in the definition put forth in Appendix A, as should not include a strict prohibition state legislatures and the courts. well. This term was used in the NPRM on discharge from the Microphor. The within the exception for commuter III. Section-by-Section Analysis subject matter of this rulemaking is service, and had not been previously sanitary conditions in the locomotive. It is important to note that FRA’s final defined in part 229. FRA does not have primary rule text set forth below differs in some FRA added a definition for the term responsibility over discharges from respects from the other federal and state ‘‘commuter work train’’, in response to interstate conveyances, and even if it sanitation standards because of the comments received from APTA. FRA becomes necessary for FRA to regulate unique characteristics of the railroad agrees that a definition should be in this area to protect employee health, operating environment. The working provided and uses the definition that there is no reason to delay the present environment for railroad cab employees has been used for work trains on freight final rule in order to address the issue is quite different than the typical railroads, without any restriction on of discharges. Further, given the number American worker. Existing locomotive tonnage. The definition of work train of units currently in use throughout the toilet systems and corresponding developed for freight railroads involves country, the adverse impact of such a maintenance needs are not uniform power brake application, and so tonnage prohibition would be enormous. Most throughout the industry. Employees in the work train is extremely likely, there would be a substantial may work on a different locomotive and important. In this rule, tonnage has increase in the number of unsanitary a variety of routes each day of the week. nothing to do with sanitation facilities toilet compartments, clogged Employee assignments and actual time on commuter lines, and so FRA did not commodes, and unhealthy conditions spent in the cab may vary significantly include any restriction on tonnage.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16037
The definition of the term ‘‘modesty tanks, carriers typically now provide approach to this is governed by the need lock’’ relates to a rudimentary lock that packs of bottled water to cab employees. to encourage use of sanitary facilities on would be required on the door of the Also, on many of the newer a regular basis as a matter of good sanitation compartment. The modesty locomotives, there is no large water health. Even if a condition is objectively lock is a lock or latch that is operated holding tank for employee use, and harmless (as determined by later by the occupant of the sanitation carriers with these units also utilize the laboratory analysis), the fact that it gives compartment to provide privacy while convenience and safety aspects of the appearance of possible in use. The rule does not require the commercially available bottled water. unhealthfulness could discourage use of modesty lock to be designed to prevent FRA sees no adverse consequences the facility and contribute to degraded deliberate forced entry. For example, associated with this usage, and believes health. some locks could be designed to provide it may decrease the risk of illness to cab To limit disruption of service because emergency access, to accommodate employees. of conditions over which the carrier has carrier concerns that access may be The final rule includes definitions for limited control, the railroads suggested required in the event of an accident or the terms ‘‘sanitary’’ and ‘‘unsanitary,’’ that certain conditions be treated as health problem. Such access could be which involve the absence or presence unsanitary only if ‘‘caused by gained, for example, by using a coin to of filth, trash, and waste that cause a mechanical or maintenance failure in turn a slotted pin or using a pencil reasonable person to believe that the the compartment.’’ This language would inserted into a hole to slide a latch. condition might constitute a health present enforcement difficulties for FRA Such simple measures would prevent hazard; and persistent odor sufficient to in determining whether a mechanical or inadvertent intrusion, thereby deter normal use of the facility or to give maintenance failure has occurred. This maintaining privacy while allowing rise to a reasonable concern with respect raises issues that could legitimately bear prompt emergency access. Most to exposure to hazardous fumes. FRA on the exercise of FRA enforcement locomotives are now equipped with a believes that providing these definitions discretion, yet FRA believes such issues modesty lock that meets the definition, adds clarity to this issue and ultimately shouldn’t serve as a defense to failure to and these existing locks vary from helps the industry comply with the address unsanitary conditions at the property to property. In addition, there standard. These terms when used in daily inspection. No railroad employee are a variety of products available on the ordinary discussion are somewhat should have to contend with unsanitary market that would meet the subjective, and might produce different conditions left behind by a trespasser or requirements of this definition, which inferences among different people. prior employee user of the facility. Therefore, FRA’s definition incorporates vary in price, sophistication, and size. With the exception of branch lines the perceptions of a reasonable person, For example, a very simple surface- discussed below, as of the daily or the average reaction to sanitation applied slide latch may be employed to inspection, railroads should be prepared facilities, and includes specific meet the requirements of the definition. to clean a sanitation compartment and examples that would constitute At this time, FRA sees no need to service a toilet facility or to place the unsanitary conditions. Sanitary prescribe more specific requirements for unit in a trailing position if the conditions are thus defined as the the modesty lock, so that each railroad sanitation compartment is no longer absence of those conditions. The list may choose the best device among the sanitary or operative. variety of products available to suit their provided in the definition is illustrative, not exhaustive, and serves as guidance The final rule defines ‘‘sanitation equipment and cost needs, and so that to the industry of what FRA will compartment’’ as an enclosed existing locks which serve the intended consider compliant. Undoubtedly, FRA compartment on a locomotive that purpose of privacy may remain in place. inspectors and the industry will have to contains a toilet for employee use. The definition of ‘‘potable water’’ utilize on-the-spot judgments in order to Depending on the type of locomotive, references the requirements of the U.S. distinguish conditions that are these compartments may be located in Environmental Protection Agency acceptable from those that are not. the nose of the unit or at the back of the drinking water standards, which are These definitions are inserted to guide cab behind the engineer’s seat. Further widely recognized as the pertinent those local decisions in an area that can discussions below explain in detail reference standards. This definition also be very subjective. The Working Group what each sanitation compartment must states that commercially available and FRA generally accept that contain. bottled water is deemed to be potable immaculate conditions cannot be FRA defines ‘‘toilet facility’’ as a water for purposes of the sanitation expected, any more than one would system that automatically or on standards. So long as employees have expect such conditions in a public rest command of the user removes waste to potable water available in adequate room in an airport or office building. a place where it is treated, eliminated, supply for drinking and washing However, sanitation compartments are or retained such that no solid or non- purposes that is bottled and a expected to be clean and orderly treated liquid waste is thereafter recognized commercial product, the following periodic servicing and permitted to be released into the bowl, running water that might be present in cleaning. Since the duty to remedy an urinal, or room and that prevents the sanitation facility on some unsanitary condition arises only at the harmful discharges of gases or persistent locomotives does not have to strictly daily inspection, it is particularly offensive odors. FRA developed this meet the EPA drinking water guidelines. appropriate to specify a standard that definition with the assistance of the On many older locomotives in use, describes conditions most people would Working Group. There are a variety of tanks of water are present, and may find unacceptable. toilets available for use on locomotives, have been used at one time for drinking As stated in the NPRM, the Working and FRA did not wish to exclude the and washing purposes. Nothing in the Group discussed what perception the use of any of the systems that effectively rule requires removing these water ‘‘reasonable person’’ must have before a meet human sanitation needs. tanks. However, with the advent of condition is deemed unacceptable. For Therefore, this definition attempts to bottled water, and the knowledge that it instance, what amount of filth, trash, or establish performance criteria that all of is sometimes difficult to maintain human waste is considered significant the adequate facilities meet when ‘‘potable’’ water in the large, on-board by the reasonable person? FRA’s operating as intended.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16038 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
To clarify FRA’s intent concerning each trip, and this ‘‘crew pack’’ interpretive statement in 49 CFR part some of the terms in the definition, typically includes the sort of washing 209, Appendix A. This addition does ‘‘automatically * * * removing the system that is permitted by this not represent any substantive change waste’’ does not mean that waste is definition. Therefore, so long as from the NPRM. removed by gravity. Rather, this employees are provided with one of the Amendment to § 229.9, Movement of language is meant to cover systems that options included in the definition, or Non-Complying Locomotives possess sensors that flush when the others that may be developed in the occupant leaves the toilet area. It is future that provide an equivalent level The final rule adds paragraph (g) to FRA’s understanding that some toilets of sanitation, this portion of the § 229.9, which prescribes requirements that may be used on locomotives utilize sanitation requirement has been met. for the movement of non-complying this feature, and FRA believes it is an Members of the Working Group locomotives. The purpose of this effective method. However, FRA does expressed concern about restrictions on addition is to clarify that the provisions not intend that systems without a device the placement of ‘‘crew packs.’’ Some set forth in the new §§ 229.137 and to separate the waste tank from the user items in these packages are used by 229.139 establish criteria for the (such as a deflector), which simply employees while in the sanitation movement or handling of locomotives permit waste to flow to holding tanks compartment, but these packages also that are discovered to have defective or below the toilet bowl and remain there include items that employees use while unsanitary sanitation compartments at until emptied, meet this definition. working or eating in the cab, such as the time of the daily inspection. These These systems are prone to overfilling paper towels. In addition, crew packs new criteria for units with defective and noxious odors, and may go are available for pick up by locomotive sanitation compartments supercede uncleaned for some time because the crews at on-duty points throughout the those set forth in paragraphs (a)–(c) of cleaning or emptying process is very railroad network, and employees often § 229.9, which require moving unpleasant and hence doesn’t get grab several of them to keep in the cab. designated locomotives as lite or dead, accomplished. The term ‘‘on command It is likely that some of these packs under certain circumstances, and of the user’’ means that a flush won’t be placed in the sanitation sometimes require enroute failures to be mechanism is present and functions as compartment when brought on board, addressed at the nearest forward point intended. and will be placed, as a convenience, where the necessary repairs can be The definition for toilet facility also near the employee cab stand for use accomplished. These new criteria for includes the terms ‘‘harmful’’ and throughout the work shift. For these units with defective sanitation ‘‘offensive,’’ which may give rise to reasons, FRA sees no reason to require compartments also supercede the differing subjective interpretations. FRA by regulation that crew packs remain at language in § 229.21(a) and (b), that and the Working Group discussed these all times in the sanitation compartment requires defective items to be repaired words and ultimately determined that a and so, the rule does not restrict the prior to departure. As FRA and the certain amount of subjectivity is placement or contents of crew packs Working Group examined the issue of inevitable when personal preferences issued by the railroad. sanitation on locomotives, it was for cleanliness are involved. Individuals The only comment FRA received determined that alternative may differ as to what seems ‘‘offensive’’ concerning the definitions involves the requirements would be more or even ‘‘harmful.’’ FRA intends that the term ‘‘commuter work train’’ as appropriate for the handling of toilet system must effectively remove or discussed above. Therefore, FRA did not locomotives that are otherwise fit for treat waste so that odors generated in make changes to the definitions set forth service, but possess a defective toilet or the toilet area do not linger and in the NPRM, with the exception of ventilation system in the sanitation penetrate the cab working environment. adding ‘‘commuter work train.’’ FRA compartment. The power available in FRA will use its reasonable judgment in added this term to the definitions, in these units can be utilized in the train determining whether odors rise to the order to incorporate these trains in the consist, without introducing safety and level of offensiveness or harmfulness. exception for ‘‘commuter service’’ as health hazards associated with the The final rule defines ‘‘washing discussed above. In addition, FRA equipment and train movement. The system’’ as a system for use by changed the definition ‘‘transfer train’’ hazards employees face in the presence employees to maintain personal which was used in the NPRM, to of defective or unsanitary facilities are cleanliness. As defined here, the facility ‘‘transfer service’’ here in the final rule, addressed by the requirements set forth may include a secured sink, water, in order to avoid any confusion between in the new §§ 229.137 and 229.139. antibacterial soap and paper towels; or the meaning intended in this rule and Amendment to § 229.21, Daily antibacterial waterless soap; or the meaning intended for ‘‘transfer Inspection antibacterial moist towelettes and paper train’’ in the power brake rules (49 CFR towels; or any combination of 232.5). ‘‘Transfer train’’ in the power The final rule revises § 229.21 to be antibacterial cleansing agents. It is brake context expressly includes trains consistent with the new requirements in critical that all employees have that pick up or set out cars at industries §§137 and 139. As currently written, available to them a system in which while en route, and ‘‘transfer service’’ in § 229.21 requires railroads to repair all they are able to clean and sanitize their this rule refers to trains that travel from items noted on the daily inspection hands after using the toilet. There are a a point of origin to a point of destination report prior to using the locomotive. variety of antibacterial agents available that do not engage in switching. Finally, However, the new §§ 137 and 139 on the market that effectively sanitize FRA added a definition for ‘‘other short- permit locomotive units with certain and disinfect after toilet use. In haul passenger service’’ because this non-complying conditions to remain in addition, there are many locomotive term, which had previously been service beyond the date on which the units that do not possess sinks and incorporated in the definition of daily inspection occurs. For instance, running water for employees to use as commuter service, but is now expressly carriers may use a locomotive with a washing facilities. As a result of included in the same exception as defective toilet facility in switching discussions with the Working Group, ‘‘commuter service’’ requires a service for a period of up to 10 days, at FRA understands that most cab crews definition in accordance with the one which time the unit must be repaired or receive a package of items for use on FRA has previously published in its used in the trailing position. Also, the
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16039
railroad may continue to use a toilet paper to employees when they harmful gases or persistent, offensive locomotive that possesses a defective report for duty or occupy the cab for odors from developing in the first place, modesty lock until the next 92-day duty (typically in crew packs); and and so the most productive way to inspection, at which time the modesty equipped with a trash receptacle, unless eliminate the risk of noxious air in the lock must be repaired. the railroad otherwise provides portable cab is to focus attention on maintaining The fourth sentence of paragraphs (a) trash receptacles for use in the the toilet facility properly. It is also and (b) have been revised to note this sanitation compartment to employees important to note that if the toilet room change as a result of the new upon reporting for duty or occupying door is designed to be equipped with requirements in §§ 137 and 139. In the cab for duty (typically in crew seals, when the seals are maintained addition, the fifth sentence of packs). and replaced as needed, odors are less paragraphs (a) and (b) has been The Working Group and FRA likely to migrate to the interior of the modified to note that the railroads may determined that ventilation in the cab. If applicable, replacing faulty choose to record repairs of conditions sanitation compartment on much of the sanitation compartment door seals that don’t comply with §§ 229.137 and existing equipment is a simple vent in would be advisable to further protect 229.139 electronically, rather than on the wall that opens to facilitate the the cab occupants from offensive odors, the daily inspection report. Some of the exchange of fresh air with air in the although the final rule does not require carriers have stated that they have toilet area sufficiently addresses such replacement. electronic repair reporting systems in ventilation. According to discussions Section 137(a)(2) requires the place that work more efficiently than with the Working Group, which consists sanitation compartment to possess a paper records. FRA sees no reason to of parties who use and maintain door that closes, and the door must be thwart these ongoing programs, so long locomotives, these vents adequately equipped with a modesty lock. A door as they are capable of being audited and diffuse offensive odors, so long as the which closes is one that, by design or effectively track repairs. toilet is sanitary and operating. This device, stays shut when the user closes vent must be capable of opening or it. For instance, a typical interior, Section 229.137(a) Sanitation, General closing on command or control of the residential door with a door knob is a Requirements user in order to meet the requirement of door that closes. Also, a door that This portion of the sanitation ‘‘adequately ventilated.’’ Other possesses a spring device that pulls the standard sets forth the primary ventilation systems on older locomotive door closed after opening constitutes a requirements for equipping lead equipment must operate as intended, door that closes. Similarly, doors used locomotives in use with sanitation evacuating the air in the sanitation to enclose bathrooms on airplanes close facilities. FRA’s primary concern is compartment, in order to meet the when pulled shut, by way of a device providing locomotive crews in the lead proposed standard. similar to a door knob, and would meet units with access to private toilet and The ventilation systems on new the standard set forth here. (These doors washing facilities, that are equipped locomotive equipment are more also possess modesty locks to prevent with adequate ventilation, toilet paper, complex. The cab’s air flow is unwanted intrusion). FRA does not and trash containers. Paragraph (a)(1) controlled and pressurized to maximize mandate the type of closing door the requires each lead locomotive in use to air flow and equipment performance, locomotive must possess, so long as the contain a sanitation compartment, and minimize noise levels in the cab. In door closes by design or on command of except as indicated in paragraph (b) order to comply with the requirement the user. This requirement is necessary where exceptions to this requirement concerning ventilation for these newer to provide basic privacy to employees are set forth, or where a unit is designed units, that portion of the ventilation using the sanitation facilities. A such that no sanitation compartment system required to provide air modesty lock is a device operated by the exists. For instance, certain locomotive movement in the sanitation occupant from inside the toilet units used by Amtrak have toilet compartment must be operative, or compartment that prevents entry by a facilities located in the engine room, other, effective alternative provisions for person who is not aware that the which is enclosed by a door and ventilation of the sanitation compartment is occupied. A modesty otherwise meet the requirements of this compartment must be made. lock can typically be disabled from the paragraph. For purposes of this If the ventilation system for the outside in the event of an emergency standard, the engine room on these sanitation compartment is defective as that requires entry from outside the Amtrak units constitutes the sanitation of the daily inspection, the railroad may toilet compartment. FRA believes compartment. not use the unit in the lead position, employees should have the expectation The sanitation compartment must be unless repaired. If not repaired, the of privacy when using toilet facilities, adequately ventilated; equipped with a railroad may use the locomotive in consistent with similar standards issued door that closes and possesses a trailing position, in switching service by other regulatory bodies and common modesty lock; equipped with a toilet consistent with the requirements of sense. A door that closes and that facility that meets the requirements of section 137, paragraph (b)(1)(ii), or in possesses a modesty lock provides that the definition described above; transfer service consistent with the privacy. equipped with a washing system that requirements of section 137, paragraph The railroads on the Working Group meets the requirements of the definition (b)(1)(iii). The rationale for permitting expressed some concerns about a described above, unless the railroad this usage when the ventilation system modesty lock that would prevent entry otherwise provides the washing is inoperative is that trailing units are in the event of an emergency, such as an products to employees when they report unoccupied, and so no harm would accident or health problem. As defined for duty or occupy the cab for duty come from utilizing the locomotive in in the rule, the railroads may utilize (typically in crew packs), or where the that position, and the exceptions set modesty locks that can be disabled in an locomotive possesses a stationary sink forth in section 139(b)(1)(ii) and (iii) emergency, so long as the lock prevents that is located outside the sanitation require the carriers to provide access to an accidental or unnecessary intrusion. compartment; equipped with sufficient adequate facilities elsewhere. FRA does not prescribe specific toilet paper to meet employee needs, It is important to note that a clean, requirements concerning the form of the unless the railroad otherwise provides operable toilet facility will prevent modesty lock. Some of the railroads
VerDate 11
utilize fairly sophisticated expensive sanitation compartment, so long as compartment, portable trash bags that devices, and some utilize an employees receive them in crew packs can be included in the employee crew inexpensive, rudimentary slide device. at the beginning of their shift. The crew packs may be placed outside the These achieve the desired level of packs will be made available to crews at sanitation compartment. In these privacy, and also provide the employer their reporting point or onboard the instances, the Working Group and FRA with the ability to enter the locomotive. The employer must provide expect that the trash bags will be placed compartment in the event of an these items to employees. at a location that is as far from the cab emergency. Either meet the requirement. This paragraph also permits sinks stand as possible, such as in the nose of As FRA understands it, most located adjacent to the sanitation the cab. FRA and members of the locomotives are currently equipped compartment to remain outside the Working Group wish to segregate with closing doors that have modesty sanitation compartment. According to sanitation-related trash from the area locks, and if not, the costs associated information received from the Working where employees work and often eat with adding modesty locks to Group, at least one Class I railroad during the course of the work shift. In unequipped units are minimal. In the maintains locomotives with stationary large measure, the location of the Working Group discussions, the sinks that are not in, or capable of being portable trash bags will be controlled by industry representatives indicated that placed in, the sanitation compartment. the employees working in the cab, who all units could be equipped with FRA sees no safety or health risk have a natural interest in keeping the modesty locks by October 6, 2003. associated with this configuration and, sanitation-related trash away from the The rule requires all sanitation therefore, the standard does not prohibit work and eating areas of the cab. compartments to be equipped with a this. If it is determined during the daily closing door as of the daily inspection. Section 229.137(a)(5) states that the inspection that the sanitation However, if the modesty lock is sanitation compartment must contain compartment is not equipped with a defective as of the daily inspection, the toilet paper in sufficient quantity to trash receptacle, or the crew has not railroad is not required to remove a meet employee needs, unless the been provided one in a crew pack, the locomotive from service. The railroad is railroad otherwise provides employees railroad must equip the locomotive with required to repair the modesty lock on with toilet paper when they report for a trash receptacle prior to departure. or before the next 92-day inspection duty or occupy the cab for duty. FRA This may be accomplished by placing a required by part 229. chose not to prescribe a specific amount trash receptacle in the sanitation Section 229.137(a)(3)–(a)(4) require of toilet paper for each employee in the compartment, or by providing portable toilets and washing systems in lead cab, believing that this issue is best trash receptacles to employees in their locomotives in use. FRA understands handled through common sense crew packs when they report for duty or that there are many varieties of toilet decision making at the local level. As occupy the cab for duty. facilities that function effectively on FRA understands it, some railroads board locomotives, and there are likely maintain toilet paper in the sanitation Section 229.137(b) Exceptions to be technological improvements that compartment, and some rely on crew Paragraph (b) of § 229.137 sets forth will bring about new units in the future. packs for dissemination of toilet paper. exceptions to the general requirements The rule takes a performance approach FRA believes either method is adequate, proposed in paragraph (a), discussed to toilet and washing systems, rather so long as reasonable amounts of toilet above. Paragraph (b)(1)(i)–(v), set forth than specifying units by name in the paper are provided to meet typical daily exceptions to the general requirement of definition, so that effective existing needs. If it is determined during the a sanitation compartment in each lead systems and systems not yet developed, daily inspection that a locomotive is not locomotive in use. These exceptions are not unintentionally excluded. equipped with sufficient toilet paper, accommodate unique circumstances. As discussed above, FRA does not the unit must be equipped prior to Paragraph (b)(1)(i) exempts wish to prescribe a particular type of departure. For most railroads, this locomotives used in commuter service washing system. However, each lead requirement will be accomplished by or other short-haul passenger service locomotive must have one of the the use of crew packs, which contain where employees have access to systems outlined in the definition ample toilet paper for each employee’s sanitation facilities at frequent intervals, available for employee use. This work shift. either at stations or elsewhere on the paragraph states that the washing Section 229.137(a)(6) requires each train. ‘‘Commuter service’’ and ‘‘other system must be located in the sanitation sanitation compartment to contain a short-haul passenger service’’ are compartment, unless it is otherwise trash receptacle, unless the railroad defined at length in 49 CFR part 209, provided to employees when they report provides portable trash receptacles in Appendix A. Most commuter and other for duty, enter the cab for duty, or where the employee crew packs. This short-haul runs are relatively short in the locomotive possesses a stationary requirement attempts to provide duration, and provide many sink that is not located in the sanitation flexibility to the railroad where space opportunities during a work shift to use compartment. Based on discussions limitations in locomotive sanitation facilities at downtown or outlying with the Working Group, FRA compartments prevent an across-the- terminals. Typically, cab crews in understands that on some locomotives, board requirement for permanent trash commuter service may use sanitation washing systems are located in the toilet cans or similar fixtures in all sanitation facilities in the stations they service in compartment, but in many cases they compartments. Therefore, the trash the course of their route, or in the are provided to employees in crew receptacle may be a permanent trash can passenger cars they are hauling. packs. Many railroads give crew packs or similar fixture in the sanitation Therefore, FRA sees no need to require to employees as they begin each work compartment, or the trash receptacle the locomotive cabs in commuter shift, and they typically contain may be a small plastic bag that hangs operations to also possess a sanitation antibacterial soap, paper towels or moist from the door handle or is posted to an facility. In most cases, the configuration towelettes, toilet paper, and perhaps interior wall. In addition, where the of commuter locomotives differs from bottled water. As stated above, FRA sees space limitations in the sanitation traditional freight locomotives. Most do no need to require the railroad to compartment prohibit placing any sort not currently possess sanitation maintain washing products in the of trash receptacle in the sanitation compartments and there may be no
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16041
additional space to add such a apply. If the switching activity places However, these Class III railroads must compartment. cab employees at locations where provide or arrange for sanitation This exception makes clear that the railroad sanitation facilities are not facilities along the right-of-way. (It is sanitation facilities employees use must accessible to employees, then the carrier important to note that these be provided by the railroad. In other must provide a locomotive that is requirements prohibit removing toilet words, the employer may not utilize this equipped with all of the items required facilities from locomotives, if those exception to the general requirement if by paragraph (a) of this section. locomotives are equipped with a toilet employees are forced to use sanitation Paragraph (b)(1)(iii) relates to transfer on the effective date of the final facilities in businesses along the right- service, and tracks the same logic as the standards. This is discussed in detail of-way that have no connection to the exceptions proposed for commuter below.) employer, such as restaurants, plants, or operations and switching service. Most Class III railroads are small convenience stores. The rule requires Transfer service involves trains that businesses with limited capital margins. each commuter railroad operation travel between a point of origin and a (The current definition of these entities, subject to these standards to provide point of final destination not exceeding as established by the Surface sanitation facilities, and employees twenty miles and that do not perform Transportation Board, is a railroad that must not be placed in situations where switching service. Because the cab earns $20 million or less in annual they are forced to request permission to employees engaged in transfer service operating revenues.) Typically, use the sanitation facilities of foreign generally have the opportunity to use purchasing new locomotives would be establishments during the workday. So railroad-provided sanitation facilities, as out of the question for these companies, long as these conditions are met, and needed during the course of their work and spending considerable funds to because the nature of commuter shift, the existing locomotives used in retrofit old units could mean that operations affords employees the transfer service do not have to contain critical safety programs in other opportunity for frequent access a sanitation compartment. These disciplines would suffer. The older throughout the shift, FRA sees no reason employees are less likely to face long locomotive equipment generally to impose a new, costly requirement for periods of time in the locomotive cascades down to the Class III railroads, cab toilets on commuter railroad without access to sanitation facilities in and over time the Class III railroads will locomotives. rail yard buildings or at railroad-owned acquire toilet-equipped locomotives. Paragraph (b)(1)(ii) permits all facilities along the right-of-way. If the Currently, many of the older locomotive locomotives engaged in switching railroad is unable to provide such units are not equipped with toilet service, where employees have access to facilities to accommodate employee facilities, and some of the units actually railroad-provided sanitation facilities needs, then the carrier must utilize lack space for toilet facilities, depending outside of the cab, to operate without a locomotives that possess toilet facilities on the purpose it was originally sanitation compartment in the cab. that otherwise meet the requirements of intended to serve. FRA believes that it ‘‘Switching service’’ is defined as the this proposal. (It is important to note would create great financial hardship classification of freight and passenger that these requirements prohibit for these entities to require sanitation cars according to commodity or removal of toilet facilities from retrofits or new locomotive purchases. destination; assembling cars for train locomotives engaged in transfer service, Some of the small operators might movements; changing the position of if the locomotives are equipped with a simply opt out of the industry, and for cars for purposes of loading, unloading, toilet on the effective date of the final others, the diversion of funds could or weighing; placing locomotives and standards. Also, all locomotives create safety problems elsewhere. cars for repair or storage; or moving rail manufactured after the effective date of Therefore, this exception should help to equipment in connection with work the final rule must be equipped with a ensure that the sanitation standards do service that does not constitute a train toilet facility accessible without going not give rise to additional safety movement. This definition is taken from outside the locomotive. These concerns or destroy otherwise the power brake regulations (49 CFR requirements are discussed in greater productive business concerns. However, 232.5) and will be construed as the term detail below.) Finally, it is important to the Class III railroads that choose to is used in those rules. note that ‘‘transfer service’’ has a avail themselves of this exception must The exception for switching service is different meaning than the term provide or arrange for adequate similar to and based on the same general ‘‘transfer train’’ as used the freight sanitation facilities, which means they principle as the exception provided for power brake regulations (49 CFR 232.5). must be available to employees readily, commuter service. Employees engaged In the power brake rules, trains that pick frequently, and as needed along the in switching service are typically in the up or deliver cars at industries before right-of-way. cab for relatively short periods of time, arriving at the point of destination are This exception does not permit a and have access to sanitation facilities nevertheless transfer trains. However, in Class III railroad to advise employees to in rail yard buildings or railroad this rule, made clear by the NPRM use sanitation facilities at restaurants facilities along the right-of-way. definition of ‘‘transfer train’’ FRA and and other public establishments that Generally, these employees are not the working group did not intend to have no business connection to the captive in a locomotive cab for long include in the exception trains that stop carrier. These Class III employers may time periods, where a sanitation facility en route to perform switching, because not assume that employees will locate clearly must be provided. Therefore, the employees on such trains often are sufficient sanitation facilities on their rule permits locomotives used in captive in the cab for long periods of own. The Class III railroad must take switching service to operate without a time without an opportunity to use affirmative action to see that the cab toilet in the cab, so long as employees bathroom facilities. employees have frequent access, as have ready access to railroad-provided Paragraph (b)(1)(iv) exempts needed, to adequate sanitary facilities. If sanitation facilities along the right-of- locomotives of Class III railroads that it is not possible for the railroad to way or in yard facilities at frequent are not equipped with toilet facilities, provide adequate sanitary facilities intervals during the work shift. If a and that are not engaged in switching or along the right-of-way, then it will railroad is unable to provide the transfer service, from the requirement of consult with customers or other alternate access, this exception cannot having a toilet facility in the cab. businesses along the route for the
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16042 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
specific purpose of garnering access to the concepts accurately and still provide applicable sanitation standards.’’ This adequate sanitation facilities for sufficient flexibility to accommodate the means that the alternate sanitation employees. In addition, the Class III changeable nature of railroad facilities offered by the carrier must railroad must communicate to operations. The Working Group meet the state or federal standards for employees the locations and, as discussed establishing specific time sanitation equipment and servicing that appropriate, hours of availability of periods or distances traveled that might apply to that workplace. For instance, if access to the sanitation facilities equate to a satisfactory and concise the alternate facility is located in an provided by the carrier via customers or definition of these terms. However, office building along the right-of-way other businesses along the route. FRA members of the Working Group that falls within the authority of OSHA and the Working Group expect that the recognized that individuals’ access for purposes of sanitation, this rule Class III railroad will consider 24-hour needs vary greatly from person-to- requires the railroads to select facilities railroad operations in these person and from day-to-day. Further, that meet OSHA standards concerning determinations, and which facilities the Working Group noted that it may the presence and condition of toilet and will be available during every work take 5 hours to traverse 5 miles on a washing facilities. FRA is exercising shift. given day, depending on traffic, jurisdiction over cab employee access to Paragraph (b)(1)(v) states that weather, load, and other considerations. sanitary facilities, specific sanitation locomotives of scenic, tourist, historic, Therefore, the Working Group rejected equipment on rolling stock, and the or excursion railroads, which are not the notion of a hard and fast time or servicing and use of that equipment on steam-powered, which operate on the mileage limit as an appropriate solution rolling stock. FRA does not intend to general system, and are otherwise to this question. oust OSHA’s existing authority with covered by the locomotive safety Instead, the Working Group offered an respect to sanitation equipment, or its standards set forth in 49 CFR part 229, explanation of the concept of adequate maintenance, where it exists elsewhere. are not required to be equipped with access to sanitation facilities, where Of course, FRA will not enforce the compliant toilet facilities, so long as locomotives covered by these ‘‘otherwise applicable standards;’’ the employees working in these locomotives exceptions are not equipped with a agency with enforcement authority have access to appropriate facilities at toilet facility: on reasonable demand or (OSHA in the example set forth here) frequent intervals during their work need by a crew member, the local must do so. In addition, FRA will not shift. The rationale for this proposal is railroad officials would make immediate determine the applicability or correct similar to the proposed exceptions for accommodations to provide access to interpretation of another agency’s Class III entities. The railroads the railroad’s sanitation facilities at sanitation standards or whether those addressed by this paragraph have frequent intervals during the course of standards have been violated. That will limited profit margins and utilize older their work shift. As used here, the term also fall within the authority of the equipment that may not possess ‘‘immediate accommodations’’ means agency that promulgated the applicable sanitation facilities on board. The costs that the employer would begin the standard and FRA will rely on the to retrofit these units would adversely process of providing access to sanitation determinations of those other agencies. impact the viability of these operations, facilities when the employee requests it. Paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (b)(2)(ii) and on some of the present equipment, The general principle that FRA and provide exceptions to the requirement may not be possible. FRA believes that the Working Group intend to capture of a toilet facility that conforms with the so long as the employees who work on with these terms is that employees definition of toilet facility, until those these units are provided appropriate would have access to sanitation nonconforming toilet facilities have facilities throughout the course of the facilities, as the need arises, that are been replaced with compliant ones. work shift, there would be no reason to located in close proximity to the work Paragraph (b)(2)(i) addresses a specific require these locomotives to be site, and that are owned or operated by type of toilet facility that a Class I equipped with sanitation facilities. the railroad. In many circumstances, railroad possesses on approximately 500 Representatives of tourist and these terms simply mean an employee locomotive units. This toilet, referred to excursion railroads suggested that this could disembark from a locomotive in a as a ‘‘bogan,’’ is similar to portable paragraph should be changed to state yard, use a toilet in a nearby building, toilets that are often used at outdoor that the tourist operator or employer is and then return to the locomotive. events, where the need for mobile, basic responsible for providing access to However, if employees work in remote toilet facilities exists. This toilet does adequate toilet facilities rather than the locations where sanitation facilities do not meet the requirements of the ‘‘railroad carrier.’’ Some tourist not exist, the railroad would be required definition for toilet facility, has no flush operations may not be ‘‘carriers’’ under to provide employees with alternate mechanism and simply permits waste to other federal laws. Also, as written in transportation to a nearby site, in order fall to a tank below the toilet seat for the NPRM, there may be confusion to make use of one of the exceptions storage, treatment, and periodic concerning whether the tourist operator listed above. These terms follow the disposal. Chemicals are placed in the or the owner of the track on which the logic of standards promulgated by the storage tank to treat waste and minimize tourist organization travels is U.S. Occupational Safety and Health odors that would otherwise accumulate. responsible for providing access to Administration (OSHA) and its recent Maintenance of these toilets may be a facilities. FRA has changed the final interpretation, which place priority on greater challenge than is the case with rule to state that the tourist railroad access as the need arises. This principle more contemporary technology, and must arrange for sanitary facilities. is important because of the adverse failure to properly maintain them could It is difficult to define with specificity health effects that may occur if access is result in unacceptable conditions. the terms ‘‘ready access’’ and ‘‘frequent denied. Also, this principle enhances an The Class I railroad owner of the intervals,’’ which are used in paragraphs employee’s ability to focus on the work bogan toilets is replacing these units as (b)(1)(i)–(b)(1)(vi). FRA and the Working being done, and improves the likelihood they become defective, and is retiring Group spent a great deal of time that safe train movements will occur. them as the locomotives on which they discussing the terms and the concepts It is important to note that each of are situated are retired. The bogan they convey. All struggled with these exceptions require the carriers to toilets are being replaced with toilets appropriate language that would capture provide facilities that ‘‘meet otherwise that incorporate advanced technology.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16043
For that reason, the Working Group practicable, and ‘‘power sharing’’ the daily inspection required by 49 CFR recommended that FRA permit these arrangements in the railroad industry 229.21. En route failures that occur after toilets to remain in use until they are are growing. FRA agrees that this system the daily inspection impose no burden retired by the carrier as part of the should be retired, but also recognizes on the railroad, until the next daily railroad’s plan for replacing them. The the significant capital and labor costs inspection is due. However, according rule text permits the bogan toilets to associated with a massive retrofit to Working Group members, the current remain in service on this Class I railroad campaign. The railroad has initiated a railroad practice concerning en route until they become defective or are replacement program in which toilet failures is to move defective toilet replaced with conforming units, approximately 30 locomotives per units into a trailing position, where it is whichever occurs first. Although FRA month are being retrofitted with new possible to do so. Although the final would prefer more modern systems in toilet facilities that comply with the rule does not require such movement, place on all locomotives, FRA is not rule. In addition, this carrier has the enhanced focus on sanitation presently aware of an imminent, serious decided not to deliver locomotives with facilities that will naturally occur as a safety or health risk associated with the the older toilet facilities in the lead result of this standard should increase bogan that calls for immediate removal. position to other railroads in the likelihood that the practice will Given the costs associated with toilet interchange, and the final rule proliferate. retrofit and the carrier’s own plan to incorporates that restriction for the The requirement set forth in replace the units, FRA believes that an period of retrofit. Finally, this carrier paragraph (c) reflects the fundamental exception is appropriate. Finally, it is has stated its intention to make every need to provide employees with a clean, important to note that this carrier reasonable effort to place compliant safe workplace. It is inconsistent with objects to and disagrees with any locomotives in the lead position on its notions of decency and the minimum inference or statement that the current system wherever possible. FRA and the requirements for workplaces in other systems in place are inadequate or are Working Group are satisfied at this industries to expect employees to work not properly maintained. point in time that the retrofit program effectively and safely if unsanitary This exception applies only to the and the carrier’s commitment to place waste or deplorable odors are present. Class I railroad that FRA knows locomotives with compliant toilets in The Working Group agrees with this possesses these toilet systems. FRA is the lead where possible, is the best principle and believes that the final rule unaware of any other railroads that use solution to the problem presented. is appropriate for the railroad industry. this toilet, and after requesting Based on the number of units in need In order for a locomotive to be placed comments, believes the unit is isolated of retrofit, FRA and the Working Group or remain in the lead position as of the on this particular railroad. estimate that all of the railroad’s daily inspection, all aspects of the toilet In connection with this exception and locomotives are capable of being in facility must be operating as intended the exception set forth in paragraph compliance with the final rule by July and it must be clean. The chemicals (b)(2)(ii), it is important to note that 1, 2003. Therefore, the rule permits the required by certain systems must be certain state standards may require flush Class I railroad to operate locomotives supplied in the appropriate amount so toilets for cab employees, and this final in the lead position on its lines with that the toilet will operate properly; if rule preempts those standards. non-compliant units until July 1, 2003. the system calls for antifreeze, it must Therefore, FRA wishes to make every After that date, all lead units must be present during winter months to effort to minimize the use of non-flush possess compliant toilet facilities. prevent freezing; any integral flush systems. FRA and the Working Group Finally, it is important to note that this mechanisms or sensors must operate as have no desire to issue or recommend carrier objects to and disagrees with any intended; and all components of the standards that ultimately permit the use inference or statement that the current system intended to be present must be of systems that are more rudimentary systems in place are inadequate or are present. than those permitted by existing state not properly maintained. As discussed above, the rule defines standards. However, FRA understands This exception applies only to the the terms ‘‘unsanitary’’ and ‘‘sanitary’’ that certain accommodations may be Class I railroad that FRA knows to help the industry and FRA inspectors necessary in the short term in order to possesses these toilet systems. FRA is determine which conditions may be achieve that goal. unaware of any other railroads that noncompliant. FRA believes that most Paragraph (b)(2)(ii) addresses a similar utilize this toilet, and the AAR has individuals have a general sense of situation that exists on another Class I confirmed that in its comments. conditions that constitute unsanitary railroad, in which the toilet facility in Paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (b)(2)(ii) relate facilities, and FRA inspectors will place on a majority of the carrier’s only to the type of toilet facility in use. utilize that sensible approach to locomotives does not comply with the The other requirements set forth apply enforcing this standard. The definitions proposed definition of toilet facility. to these railroads and their equipment should provide additional clarity to that These toilet facilities use railroad- according to their terms. For instance, process. provided plastic liners to collect human the requirements set forth in paragraphs In discussions prior to publication of waste; these liners are then sealed, (a)(1)–(2), and (a)(4)–(6) apply to these the NPRM, members of the Working placed in sealed waste containers, and locomotives. Similarly, § 229.139, Group raised concerns about the delivered by the employees to the which relates to servicing and operative difficulties of providing a substitute railroad for disposal. Although the equipment, requires the units covered locomotive that possesses a sanitary, carrier believes this system adequately by paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (b)(2)(ii) to operable toilet facility on branch lines addresses sanitation needs for cab operate as intended and be located in in remote locations. Although rare, employees, concerns about the system sanitation compartments that are these instances might occur where no have been raised by employees, ventilated and free of debris and waste. compliant locomotives are available, landowners along the right-of-way, and Paragraph (c) of section 137 prohibits and so a defective unit and its freight certain State agencies. Further, as the a railroad from placing a locomotive could not move for repair. Therefore, carrier recognizes, proper with an unsanitary or defective toilet FRA and the Working Group developed administration of this system off the facility in the lead position. This an exception for these instances, carrier’s home lines sometimes is not determination is made as of the time of proposed it in the NPRM, and placed it
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16044 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
in the final rule in paragraph (c). All of achieved by a means as simple as the cannot be used. Either method, and the conditions listed below must be crew making use of a toilet facility at a others that may be in use, are sufficient, present in order for the exception to known place of business, such as a so long as a reasonable person entering apply: restaurant, that is regularly frequented the cab would understand that the toilet —The defective or unsanitary condition by the crew during their breaks. facility is defective and should not be must be discovered at a location However, access to a toilet facility used. where there are no other suitable (i.e., outside the locomotive that meets Paragraph (e) states that when it is having sufficient power to complete otherwise applicable sanitation determined during the daily inspection the haul) locomotives available for standards may not be available to the that a road locomotive toilet facility is use. Where it is not possible to switch crew during the work shift for reasons defective, but sanitary, the railroad may another locomotive into the lead such as personal safety while not on move the locomotive into switching or position due to space or track railroad property, or simply because the transfer service for a very brief period of limitations, or where the location is time required for to walk to a toilet time, consistent with the requirements not equipped to repair or clean the facility may impede railroad operations. for that service, as discussed above. The locomotive, there are ‘no locomotives In these situations, the railroad may unit may be used in this service for a available for use’; meet a reasonable request by providing period not to exceed 10 days, at which —The locomotive, while noncompliant, transportation to a toilet facility during time it must be repaired or used in has not traveled through a location the work shift. trailing position. If the railroad chooses where it could have been cleaned, This exception is distinct from the to utilize the equipment in this manner repaired or switched with a compliant other exceptions in paragraph 137(b) prior to its repair, the carrier must locomotive since its last required that use the terms ‘‘ready access to clearly mark the defective toilet facility daily inspection; railroad-provided sanitation facilities so that a reasonable person would know —Upon reasonable request, the carriers outside of the locomotive, that meet not to use the toilet facility. The must arrange for access to toilet otherwise applicable sanitation Working Group and FRA do not expect facilities for employees assigned to standards, at frequent intervals during the railroads to reassign locomotives work on the locomotive during the the course of their work shift.’’ Because from road to yard service solely for the time they must work on it; the branch line situation typically purpose of circumventing any part of —If unsanitary conditions exist, the involves remote locations where ‘‘ready this regulation. FRA understands that sanitation compartment door must be access’’ in not possible and should there are overriding incentives for closed and sufficient ventilation occur rarely, the rule imposes a different railroads to keep road units with standard than is required in other defective toilets in trailing road service provided to the cab compartment so operational settings. until the next periodic inspection, that employees aren’t exposed to Paragraph (d) of section 137 requires rather than reassigning them to yard strong, persistent chemical or human that when a railroad finds a toilet service. waste odors sufficient to deter use of facility defective or unsanitary at the Paragraph (f) of this section requires the facility or to give rise to a time of the daily inspection, the carrier that if a carrier discovers during the reasonable concern with respect to may utilize the unit in a trailing daily inspection that a lead locomotive exposure to hazardous fumes; and position. However, if the unit is is not equipped with sufficient toilet —The locomotive must be repaired, subsequently used to haul employees, it paper, washing facilities, or a trash cleaned or switched with a compliant must be cleaned prior to occupancy and receptacle, the carrier must equip the unit at the next daily inspection or the defective toilet facilities must be clearly unit prior to departure. This reflects next location at which such service marked as unavailable for use. This FRA’s belief that it would be unwise to can take place, whichever occurs first. paragraph and others that follow require a railroad to change the consist This exception cannot be used where establish the requirement that occupied makeup due to a lack of toilet paper, a second locomotive exists, but it also locomotives should not expose washing facilities, or a trash bag. These contains a defective or unsanitary employees to unsanitary conditions. items are relatively easy to locate and sanitation compartment. The rule does FRA recognizes that locomotive toilets supply to cab crews, and so should be not encourage deferral of necessary periodically malfunction. The railroad provided before any employee is maintenance and cleaning where should not be penalized for these expected to depart. Therefore, the locomotives can reasonably be expected events, and under prescribed railroad must simply equip the to be pressed into service as lead units circumstances, should be able to utilize locomotive with these items prior to at any time. This exception is available the available power in the equipment. departure. Most railroads supply these only where there is just one locomotive However, the railroad must minimize items to cab employees as they begin available and it possesses a defective or employee exposure to the hazards of their work shift, and so this requirement unsanitary sanitation compartment, or untreated waste and other unsanitary should not impose burdens on the where there is no additional track to use conditions. Therefore, the carrier must industry. to facilitate switching a compliant clean any trailing units if they will be Paragraph (g) states that when it is locomotive into the lead position, and occupied, and must mark defective discovered during the daily inspection all of the other conditions listed in the toilet facilities so that employees that the sanitation compartment rule text are present. understand the toilet facility cannot be ventilation is defective, the carrier must In order to fall within this exception, used. repair it prior to departure, or place the the rule requires the railroad to arrange During this process, the Working locomotive in trailing position, in for access to a toilet facility outside the Group did not believe it necessary to switching service consistent with the lead locomotive, upon reasonable require a standard method for requirements of paragraph (b)(1)(ii), or request of an employee assigned to work identification of defective sanitation in transfer service consistent with the onboard the locomotive. While it units, and FRA sees no reason to do so requirements of (b)(1)(iii). As discussed remains the responsibility of the either. Some carriers use a red tag to earlier, the rationale for permitting this railroad to provide access to a toilet indicate defective conditions, and some usage when the ventilation system is facility, FRA expects that access will be railroads tape the toilet seat so that it inoperative is that trailing units are
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16045
typically unoccupied, and so no harm provide the most accommodating access industry agree that this requirement is would come from utilizing the to sanitation facilities available—an appropriate. locomotive in that position. In addition, operable toilet on board the locomotive. Finally, § 229.137(k) requires that the exceptions set forth in section A toilet facility on the locomotive is where the washing system in place on 137(b)(1)(ii) and (iii) require the carriers preferable to one along the right-of-way. the lead locomotive includes the use of to provide access to adequate facilities Employees can utilize it as the need water, the water must be potable. This elsewhere, and so employees would be arises, which diminishes the risk of requirement is consistent with the using ventilated facilities in those health problems. They would not be principle that nonpotable water should circumstances. forced to leave running equipment on not be used by humans for personal Paragraph (h) of section 137 provides the track or slow planned operations, cleanliness, due to bacteria that may be that if the sanitation compartment is not which can create safety risks. Also, as present. As discussed above, railroads equipped with a door that closes when older locomotives cascade down to the may use waterless soaps, now available pulled shut as of the daily inspection, Class III railroads, this requirement commercially, that do not require water; the door must be repaired prior to enhances the likelihood that small they may use bottled water that is departure, or the locomotive must be entities will inherit locomotives potable; or they may use water in moved from lead position to trailing, equipped with toilet facilities. holding tanks located in the toilet transfer service, or switching service. In Paragraph (j) requires all locomotives compartment, so long as it meets the addition, this paragraph states that if the manufactured after the effective date of safe drinking water standards. modesty lock, required to be present in this rule to include a toilet facility Section 229.139 Sanitation, Servicing order to prevent unintended intrusion, accessible to cab employees without Requirements is defective as of the daily inspection, walking outside. The design may the locomotive may remain in use in the require walking out of the cab into other Section 229.139 establishes minimum lead so long as the lock is repaired by compartments of the locomotive, but servicing standards to ensure that the date on which the next 92-day walking outside to use the toilet is sanitation compartments in occupied inspection is due. (See discussion for disfavored. This paragraph prohibits locomotives are not unsanitary or § 229.139(e) below.) The rationale for railroads from using any locomotive defective. Paragraph (a) states that the this requirement is that the first priority built after the rule’s effective date unless railroad must service the sanitation for cab employees is to have the benefit it is so designed. This paragraph reflects compartments of lead locomotives in of a door that closes while using toilet FRA’s desire that all cab employees will use so that they are sanitary. This facilities for each assignment in a lead work in a locomotive equipped with a requirement means that the floors, toilet locomotive in use. Therefore, the door toilet facility in the future. facility, and washing system must be must close as designed, as of the daily There are two narrow exceptions to free of trash and waste. It is reasonable inspection. So long as the compartment this standard relating to switching units to expect that, as a locomotive is used, door closes as it should, a unit with a that are built exclusively for switching some amount of dust and trash would defective modesty lock may remain in service and commuter locomotives accumulate. However, in order to meet service until the date on which the next designed exclusively for commuter the requirements of paragraph (a), the 92-day inspection is required. FRA service. With respect to the switching trash must be removed at regular believes that affirming an employee’s service exception, the Working Group intervals, and used, soiled paper expectation of privacy while using toilet and FRA recognize that units that are products or human waste may not be facilities will contribute to appropriate created exclusively for yard service are present on the floor. use of the facilities and consequent good often too small and oddly shaped to As drafted in the NPRM, paragraph (b) health. The rule balances legitimate accommodate a toilet facility. Also, of section 139 required that all employee privacy needs, by requiring a because of their size and configuration, components required by paragraph (a) of door that closes, and the legitimate these units are not used on long hauls section 137 for the lead locomotive must difficulties associated with making use over the road on which employees be present consistent with the of a locomotive while moving it to the would need toilet facilities in the cab. requirements of sections 137 and 139, correct repair facility, by permitting the Under all circumstances, these units and must be maintained so that they locomotive with a defective modesty would be used in yard service, where operate as intended. FRA did not dictate lock to remain in service for a limited railroad-provided sanitation facilities when and how railroads must empty, time period. exist along the right-of-way, and are clean, and service toilets. Members of Paragraph (i) provides that all available for employee use. New units the Working Group initially locomotives which are equipped with a used in transfer service would be recommended that these decisions vary toilet facility on the effective date of the required to be fitted with toilet facilities. greatly from property to property, and final sanitation rule must retain and Similarly, the Working Group and depend on weather conditions, degree maintain those toilet facilities, even FRA believe that commuter operations of use, and the toilet system in place. where the locomotive units might be provide cab employees with sufficient These members further advised that a relegated to switching service or transfer access to sanitation facilities, along the federal standard establishing specific service where toilet facilities are not right-of-way and elsewhere on the train. thresholds and time limits could result always required by this proposal. There Therefore, FRA believes that the new in unnecessary costs for some entities, is a small exception to this proposed construction requirements proposed in and could actually reduce the level of requirement, which involves cabs that this paragraph need not include safety and sanitation on others. Based are not occupied. If a railroad commuter locomotives. on that information, FRA proposed downgrades a locomotive to ‘‘booster’’ With this requirement, FRA does not language that required each railroad to or ‘‘slug’’ service, removing many of the wish to chill innovation in the design of develop an effective servicing program interior appurtenances so that the unit new equipment, but believes that toilet that suits the traffic, use, weather, is no longer intended to be occupied in facilities should be located in close equipment and other needs of the movement, the carrier may also remove proximity to cab employees in lead system so that cab employees would not the toilet facility. Railroads must retain locomotives, switching service, and be exposed to full toilet bowls, missing toilets in equipped units in order to transfer service. Members of the seats, offensive odors, frozen units, dirty
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16046 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
floors, ineffective ventilation systems, or while they are in the units. Therefore, may become defective and yet the any other condition that could the toilet facilities may actually be locomotive can continue to operate reasonably be deemed unsanitary. As for defective while the unit is occupied, but without jeopardizing the employee’s mandating specific servicing they cannot be unsanitary. health. However, the toilet facility requirements, FRA and the Working Paragraph (d) states that where a should not be allowed to remain Group determined that the railroads, in locomotive is equipped with a toilet defective indefinitely. The Working consultation with their labor forces, are facility that has become defective, and Group and FRA do not expect the in the best position to determine when the locomotive is utilized briefly in railroads to reassign locomotives from toilet facilities must be emptied and switching or transfer service consistent road to yard service solely for the cleaned. These decisions are based on a with the requirements of purpose of circumventing any part of variety of factors, including degree of §§ 229.137(b)(1)(ii) and (b)(1)(iii), the this regulation. FRA understands that use, length of trip, weather conditions, railroad must mark the toilet facility as there are overriding incentives for size of crew, and the specifications of defective. The locomotive with the railroads to keep road units with the system in place. However, FRA defective, but sanitary, toilet facility can defective toilets in trailing road service stated that it would consider more be used in switching or transfer service until the next periodic inspection, specific requirements for servicing the for a period not to exceed 10 calendar rather than reassigning them to yard toilets and invited comments. days from the date on which it became service. When FRA reconvened the Working defective, at which time it must be The 10-day period was selected as a repaired. However, the facility must result of Working Group discussions, in Group in August 2001 to discuss remain sanitary in this short period which the carriers noted that a period of comments to the NPRM, members raised while the locomotive is occupied. The 10 days may be required to get several questions about this paragraph date on which the toilet facility became appropriate parts needed for repair to and how the phrase ‘‘operating as defective must be noted on the daily remote locations where these defective intended’’ would be enforced. It became inspection report, so that the unit will units may be situated. FRA invited clear in the course of the discussion that be repaired within the prescribed time comment on this time period, and the there were a variety of interpretations period. The carriers may need to AAR stated that shortening it might for the phrase. Therefore, the railroads institute new internal procedures to impede the railroad’s ability to correct would differ in their determinations of ensure that these defects are corrected defective units. Depending on where a which locomotives could remain in the within the required time frame, because locomotive is situated in relation to a lead position, cab employees would (as some members of the Working Group repair point and the nature of the repair have a difficult time determining what have suggested), defects that need not be needed, the carriers believe ten days is constituted a defect to be listed on the repaired on a daily basis, as § 229.21 an appropriate window of time. There daily inspection report, and FRA requires with many defective were no other comments on this issue. inspectors would probably apply conditions, may be forgotten. This final Paragraph (e) requires the railroad to different standards across the industry rule amends § 229.21(a) and (b) to repair a defective modesty lock prior to in enforcing the rule. Given this permit the railroads to record repairs the next 92-day inspection that the confusion, FRA and the Working Group electronically, rather than on the daily locomotive is subject to, pursuant to the worked to list general factors that must inspection report. Several carriers noted requirements of part 229. This was exist in order for a toilet to ‘‘operate as that they currently employ an electronic recommended by all members of the intended’’. This list has been added to tracking system of defects and repairs, Working Group and balances the the rule text in this paragraph, and and would like to include violations of privacy concerns that led to the modesty applies to any compliant toilet system §§ 229.137 and 229.139 in the existing lock requirement, against the industry’s in use in the industry. The conditions electronic program. FRA wishes to interest in keeping otherwise fit are: All mechanical systems must facilitate this process, and so long as the locomotives in service. FRA believes function as designated; water must be system is capable of being audited, FRA that this paragraph reaches a reasonable present in sufficient amounts to permit does not believe it is necessary to accommodation of both aims. flushing; for systems that use chemicals regulate this internal mechanism with In addition to the foregoing issues, the for treatment, such as the Microphor, great specificity. Working Group discussed blue signal the chemicals (chlorine tablets or any During this 10-day period, the protection for railroad employees comparable oxidizing agent) must be exceptions set forth for switching and involved in servicing the sanitation present; and the bowl must be free of transfer service apply, and so the compartment, and the substance of blockage that prevents the waste from railroad is required to provide the those discussions should be illuminated evacuating the bowl. Paragraph (c) of affected cab employees access to here. FRA issued regulations that section 139 states that any unit used in sanitation facilities that meet otherwise require protections for employees switching service, transfer service, or in applicable sanitation standards. (As engaged in the inspection, testing, the trailing position that is equipped discussed previously, these defective repair, and servicing of rolling with a toilet facility must be sanitary if units may also be utilized in trailing equipment, where those activities the locomotive is occupied. This position where there is less likelihood require employees to work on, under, or requirement addresses the units that that employees will be affected at all.) between equipment, and where the might fall within the exceptions Providing that these defective units danger of personal injury exists. See 49 proposed in § 229.137(b)(1)(ii) and can remain in service for a period not CFR part 218. These regulations state (b)(1)(iii) because of the operations they to exceed 10 calendar days, at which that ‘‘servicing’’ does not include are engaged in, but nonetheless possess time they must be repaired or used in supplying locomotives with sanitary a toilet facility on board. If that is the trailing position, is consistent with supplies. See definition of ‘‘worker’’ at case, employees may opt not to use the FRA’s and the Working Group’s desire 49 CFR 218.5. Therefore, employees toilet facility, preferring to utilize other to preserve optimum access to engaged in replenishing toilet paper in facilities along the right-of-way. sanitation facilities where they currently the sanitation compartment would not However, carriers must not expose these exist. If a locomotive is equipped with be ‘‘servicing’’ the locomotive for employees to unsanitary conditions a toilet facility, FRA recognizes that it purposes of part 218, and would not
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16047
require blue signal protection. However, respectively, in order to prevent of the trash receptacles in regular other duties that employees may be degradation of the environment and intervals. engaged in relating to the repair, service, harm to employees. Nothing in this final The major benefits anticipated from maintenance or emptying of the rule alters those regulations, which implementing this final rule include: locomotive toilet facility likely would protect the environment and employees guaranteed access to sanitary facilities; fall within the scope of part 218 and from the hazards associated with assurance that toilet facilities are would require the protections set forth regulated chemicals. maintained in a clean and sanitary there. This determination may depend The second concern relates to the manner; and the assurance that cab on the toilet system in place, and so disposal of untreated waste along the employees will have potable water to each railroad must assess the need for railroad right-of-way, which would give use. In addition, railroads should incur blue signal protection on its property rise to potential environmental and some savings from having a national based on the configuration of the system employee health hazards. As FRA and uniform regulation governing in place and the functions employees understands it, nearly all locomotives sanitation facilities. In the long-term the perform relative to it. utilize sanitation systems that either FRA should see a decrease in Finally, this rule does not establish treat or burn the waste on board and complaints and correspondence related lighting requirements for the sanitation release products that do not introduce to toilet facilities. compartment. The existing locomotive environmental or personal safety Regulatory Flexibility Act safety standards require that ‘‘Cab hazards; or haul the waste in treatment passageways and compartments shall containers to a site where it is removed The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 have adequate illumination.’’ See, 49 and stored for approved processing. In (the Act) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires CFR 229.127(b). This existing any event, regulations promulgated by a review of proposed and final rules to requirement effectively addresses the the FDA prohibit the release of assess their impact on small entities. need for lighting in the sanitation untreated human waste along the FRA has prepared and placed in the compartment. The compartment must railroad right-of-way, and nothing in docket a Regulatory Flexibility be illuminated so that occupants can this proposal alters that requirement. Assessment (RFA) which assesses the clearly see all appurtenances, fixtures, Therefore, FRA has determined that this small entity impact. These documents may be reviewed and downloaded from and items present within the toilet area. rule will not have a deleterious impact the Department’s electronic docket on the environment. Appendix system or photocopies may be obtained FRA amended appendix B to part 229, Regulatory Impact by submitting a written request to the Schedule of Civil Penalties, to include FRA Docket Clerk at Office of Chief Executive Order 12866 and DOT penalties for violations of the provisions Counsel, Federal Railroad Regulatory Policies and Procedures as set forth in this rule. Please note that Administration, 400 Seventh Street, reading this or any penalty schedule This rule has been evaluated in SW., Washington, DC 20590. may be confusing without first reading accordance with existing policies and The U.S. Small Business the corresponding rule text. There is procedures, and determined to be non- Administration (SBA) stipulates in its very limited space in the penalty significant under both Executive Order ‘‘Size Standards’’ that the largest a schedule to describe the action or 12866 and DOT policies and railroad business firm that is ‘‘for- omission that constitutes a violation of procedures. 44 FR 11034; February 26, profit’’ may be, and still be classified as a particular section or paragraph. 1979. FRA has prepared and placed in a ‘‘small entity’’ is 1,500 employees for Generally, the penalty schedule is the docket a regulatory analysis ‘‘Line-Haul Operating Railroads,’’ and provided to give notice of the typical addressing the economic impact of this 500 employees for ‘‘Switching and penalty that will be assessed for a final rule. These documents may be Terminal Establishments.’’ ‘‘Small violation. When there is not enough reviewed and downloaded from the entity,’’ is defined in the Act as a small space to list the way(s) in which a Department’s electronic docket system business concern that is independently paragraph has been violated, summaries or photocopies may be obtained by owned and operated, and is not of the requirement or forbidden act is submitting a written request to the FRA dominant in its field of operation. SBA’s provided. If in doubt, the rule text Docket Clerk at Office of Chief Counsel, ‘‘size standards’’ may be altered by clearly states what is required, and the Federal Railroad Administration, 400 federal agencies after consultation with penalty schedule is provided to indicate Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC SBA and in conjunction with public what penalty is typically assessed. 20590. comment. Pursuant to that authority, As part of the regulatory impact FRA has published an interim policy Environmental Impact analysis FRA has assessed quantitative which formally establishes ‘‘small FRA has evaluated this rule in measurements of costs and a qualitative entities’’ as being railroads that meet the accordance with its procedures for discussion of the benefits expected from line haulage revenue requirements of a ensuring full consideration of the the adoption of this final rule. Over a Class III railroad. Currently, the revenue potential environmental impacts of FRA twenty year period, the Present Value requirements are $20 million or less in actions, as required by the National (PV) of the estimated costs is $70.1 annual operating revenue. The $20 Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. million. million limit is based on the Surface 4321, et seq.) and related directives. The The major costs anticipated from Transportation Board’s (STB’s) regulation of sanitation facilities on adopting this final rule include: the on- threshold of a Class III railroad, which locomotives gives rise to two potential going maintenance and servicing of is adjusted by applying the railroad environmental concerns. The first toilet facilities that are not currently revenue deflator adjustment. See, 49 relates to handling chemicals used to being serviced properly; an increase in CFR part 1201. In its policy statement, treat human waste while in transit or in the daily inspection burden to include FRA applied this same dollar limit to storage awaiting permanent disposal. additional components of the sanitation determine when a railroad shipper or These chemical substances and compartment; and providing for a contractor is a small entity for purposes employee exposure to them are separate trash receptacle in the of the Act and the RFA. FRA proposed currently regulated by EPA and OSHA, sanitation compartment and the removal to use this alternative definition of
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16048 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘small entity’’ for this rulemaking in the locomotive without a toilet to sanitary bodies have promulgated and enforce NPRM. FRA received no comments on facilities upon request. Hence, the state standards that require toilet the definition, and so FRA continues to concept of providing ready access to facilities in locomotive cabs. FRA’s apply this definition to the final rule. toilet facilities is not a new or sanitation standards preempt those state In this proceeding, there are over 550 significant burden for most Class III standards. FRA believes this regulatory small railroads that could potentially be railroads. action is warranted, however, based on affected by these standards. FRA The Class III exemption from the principles of interstate commerce and estimates that small railroads own requirement to have a toilet facility in the need for uniformity of national approximately 3,500 locomotives. In the lead occupied locomotive is standards. In addition, some State addition, the Agency estimates that only provided to ensure that a feasible lower agencies have expressed the need for about one-third of these or less have a cost alternative is available for affected federal regulation in this area to provide toilet facility on them. FRA does not small entities that need it. FRA and the uniform treatment and to prevent expect this final rule to impose a Working Group understood the situations in which employees work significant burden on small railroads. difficulties of retrofitting older without sanitation facilities where the This is because these railroads are locomotive units and saw no reason to State is powerless to enforce its provided an exemption from the unduly burden small railroads so long requirements, due to operation of the requirement to have a functioning toilet as access can be provided by alternative occupational safety and health and in any lead occupied locomotive, if the means. The Working Group believed railroad safety laws. railroad provides employee access to that this alternative is both necessary facilities at frequent intervals. and acceptable. Consistent with the requirements of The impacts from this final rule are In order to determine the significance Executive Order 13132, FRA has primarily a result of some of the of the economic impact for the final consulted with State agencies during the compliance requirements for rule’s RFA, FRA invited comments from course of this rulemaking. This was locomotives that have functioning toilet all interested parties concerning the achieved primarily through the full facilities. The most significant impacts potential economic impact on small RSAC Committee, which includes arise from complying with the entities caused by this final rule during representatives of State interests. FRA sanitation compartment requirements, the notice of proposed rulemaking stage. briefed the RSAC members on several including providing a trash receptacle, The Agency has considered the lack of occasions concerning this standard, marking defective toilet facilities, and comments and data it received in published notices concerning it, and conducting the daily inspection. Most making a decision on the RFA for the held a public hearing. None of the States small railroads own locomotives that final rule. Thus, FRA concludes and or their representative organizations never had toilet facilities on them, or certifies that this final rule is not raised concerns about any aspect of this previously had them removed. FRA expected to have an ‘‘significant’’ standard. FRA made every effort to estimates that only six percent of the economic impact on a ‘‘substantial’’ cover the subject matter Regulatory Impact Analysis’ (RIA) total number of small entities. comprehensively so that the federal cost over 20 years would impact small Federalism standard does not provide less railroads. protection than any of the individual FRA analyzed this rulemaking The requirement in the final rule that state standards, and to prevent proceeding according to the principles will impact small railroads the most is preemption of a state law or rule of Executive Order 13132 providing cab employees ready access to without replacing it with a comparable (‘‘Federalism’’), which was in effect appropriate toilet facilities. This federal standard. The States have standard means that small railroads when the final rule was prepared. FRA supported FRA’s rulemaking proceeding must arrange for en route access to toilet has determined that this final rule may on sanitation facilities for locomotive facilities for cab employees. The RIA have federalism implications. FRA’s cab employees. has estimated that there would be a 2- final sanitation standards preempt all hour burden per affected railroad during state efforts to regulate the nature and Paperwork Statement—Locomotive Cab the first year of implementation. In type of access to sanitation facilities for Sanitation Standards aggregate, this burden is estimated to cab employees. Further, FRA’s final cost approximately $22,000. The burden sanitation standards preempt the The information collection for the following years is only 30 maintenance of sanitation facilities requirements in this proposed rule have minutes per railroad per year to modify located on board trains. As was been submitted for approval to the the toilet facility arrangements. FRA discussed in the NPRM (See, 66 FR Office of Management and Budget understands that it is common practice 137), the Locomotive Inspection Act has (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction today for Class III railroads to comply been interpreted to occupy the field of Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The with the general requirements of locomotive safety, including the sections that contain the new providing ready access. Currently, it is regulation of appurtenances in information collection requirements and customary for a small railroad to locomotives, such as toilets. the estimated time to fulfill each transport a crew member from a Nonetheless, some state regulatory requirement are as follows:
Average time CFR section Respondent universe Total annual per response Total annual Total annual responses (in seconds) burden hours burden cost
229.137(d)—Sanitation—Locomotive Defec- Class I & II railroads 15,600 notices ...... 90 390 $9,750 tive or Unsanitary Toilet Facility Placed in Trailing Service—Clear Markings—Un- available for Use. 229.137(e)—Sanitation—Locomotive Defec- Class I & II railroads 15,600 notices ...... 90 390 9,750 tive Toilet Facility—Clear Markings—Un- available for Use.
VerDate 11
Average time CFR section Respondent universe Total annual per response Total annual Total annual responses (in seconds) burden hours burden cost
229.139(d)—Servicing—Locomotive Used in Class I & II railroads 93,600 notations ...... 30 780 19,500 Transfer/Switching Service with Defective Toilet Facility—Date Defective.
All estimates include the time for PART 229—RAILROAD LOCOMOTIVE trash, or human waste is present in such reviewing instructions; searching SAFETY STANDARDS a manner that a reasonable person existing data sources; gathering or would believe that the condition might maintaining the needed data; and 1. The authority citation for part 229 constitute a health hazard; or of strong, continues to read as follows: reviewing the information. Pursuant to persistent, chemical or human waste 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(B), the FRA solicits Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20102–03, 20133, odors sufficient to deter use of the comments concerning: whether these 20137–38, 20143, 20701–03, 21301–02, facility, or give rise to a reasonable 21304; 49 CFR 1.49. information collection requirements are concern with respect to exposure to necessary for the proper performance of 2. Section 229.5 is amended by hazardous fumes. Such conditions include, but are not limited to, a toilet the function of FRA, including whether adding in alphabetical order new bowl filled with human waste, soiled the information has practical utility; the definitions of ‘‘Commuter service’’, ‘‘Commuter work train’’, ‘‘Modesty toilet paper, or other products used in accuracy of FRA’s estimates of the lock’’, ‘‘Other short-haul passenger the toilet compartment, that are present burden of the information collection service’’, ‘‘Potable water’’, ‘‘Sanitary’’, due to a defective toilet facility that will requirements; the quality, utility, and ‘‘Sanitation compartment’’, ‘‘Switching not flush or otherwise remove the waste; clarity of the information to be service’’, ‘‘Toilet facility’’, ‘‘Transfer visible human waste residue on the collected; and whether the burden of service’’, ‘‘Unsanitary’’, and ‘‘Washing floor or toilet seat that is present due to collection of information on those who system’. a toilet facility that overflowed; an are to respond, including through the accumulation of soiled paper towels or use of automated collection techniques § 229.5 Definitions. soiled toilet paper on the floor, toilet or other forms of information * * * * * facility or sink; an accumulation of technology, may be minimized. Commuter service means the type of visible dirt or human waste on the floor, Organizations and individuals railroad service described under the toilet facility, or sink; and strong, desiring to submit comments on the heading ‘‘Commuter Operations’’ in 49 persistent chemical or human waste collection of information requirements CFR part 209, Appendix A. odors in the compartment. Sanitation compartment means an should direct them to the Office of * * * * * enclosed compartment on a railroad Management and Budget, FRA Desk Commuter work train is a non- revenue service train used in the locomotive that contains a toilet facility Officer, Washington, DC 20503. OMB is for employee use. required to make a decision concerning administration and upkeep service of the commuter railroad. * * * * * the collection of information Switching service means the requirements contained in this final rule * * * * * Modesty lock means a latch that can classification of railroad freight and between 30 and 60 days after passenger cars according to commodity publication of this document in the be operated in the normal manner only from within the sanitary compartment, or destination; assembling cars for train Federal Register. Therefore, a comment movements; changing the position of to OMB is best assured of having its full that is designed to prevent entry of another person when the sanitary cars for purposes of loading, unloading, effect if OMB receives it within 30 days compartment is in use. A modesty lock or weighing; placing locomotives and of publication. may be designed to allow deliberate cars for repair or storage; or moving rail FRA hereby provides notice that it forced entry in the event of an equipment in connection with work cannot impose a penalty on persons for emergency. service that does not constitute a train violating information collection movement. * * * * * Toilet facility means a system that requirements (ICRs) which do not Other short-haul passenger service display a current OMB control number, automatically or on command of the means the type of railroad service user removes human waste to a place if required. FRA intends to obtain described under the heading ‘‘Other where it is treated, eliminated, or current OMB control numbers for any short-haul passenger service’’ in 49 CFR retained such that no solid or non- new ICRs resulting from this rulemaking part 209, Appendix A. treated liquid waste is thereafter action prior to the effective date of the Potable water means water that meets permitted to be released into the bowl, agency’s final rule. The OMB control the requirements of 40 CFR part 141, the urinal, or room and that prevents number, when assigned, will be Environmental Protection Agency’s harmful discharges of gases or persistent announced by separate notice in the Primary Drinking Water Regulations, or offensive odors. Federal Register. water that has been approved for Transfer service means a freight train drinking and washing purposes by the List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 229 that travels between a point of origin pertinent state or local authority having and a point of final destination not Locomotives, Penalties, Railroad jurisdiction. For purposes of this exceeding 20 miles and that is not safety, Sanitation. section, commercially available, bottled performing switching service. drinking water is deemed potable water. Unsanitary means having any For the reasons set forth in the * * * * * condition in which any significant preamble, 49 CFR part 229 is amended Sanitary means lacking any condition amount of filth, trash, or human waste as follows: in which any significant amount of filth, is present in such a manner that a
VerDate 11
reasonable person would believe that § 229.139 may be noted on the report, or facilities outside of the locomotive, that the condition might constitute a health in electronic form. * * * meet otherwise applicable sanitation hazard; or strong, persistent, chemical (b) * * * Except as provided in standards, at frequent intervals during or human waste odors sufficient to deter §§ 229.9, 229.137, and 229.139, any the course of their work shift; use of the facility or to give rise to a conditions that constitute non- (iii) Locomotives engaged in transfer reasonable concern with respect to compliance with any requirement of service on which employees have ready exposure to hazardous fumes. Such this part shall be repaired before the access to railroad-provided sanitation conditions include, but are not limited locomotive is used. Except with respect facilities outside of the locomotive, that to, a toilet bowl filled with human to conditions that do not comply with meet otherwise applicable sanitation waste, soiled toilet paper, or other § 229.137 or § 229.139, a notation shall standards, at frequent intervals during products used in the toilet be made on the report indicating the the course of their work shift; compartment, that are present due to a nature of the repairs that have been (iv) Locomotives of Class III railroads defective toilet facility that will not made. Repairs made for conditions that engaged in operations other than flush or otherwise remove the waste; do not comply with § 229.137 or switching service or transfer service, visible human waste residue on the § 229.139 may be noted on the report, or that are not equipped with a sanitation floor or toilet seat that is present due to in electronic form. * * * compartment as of June 3, 2002. Where a toilet facility that overflowed; an 5. Sections 229.137 and 229.139 are an unequipped locomotive of a Class III accumulation of soiled paper towels or added to subpart C to read as follows: railroad is engaged in operations other soiled toilet paper on the floor, toilet than switching or transfer service, § 229.137 Sanitation, general employees shall have ready access to facility, or sink; an accumulation of requirements. visible dirt or human waste on the floor, railroad-provided sanitation facilities toilet facility, or sink; and strong (a) Sanitation compartment. Except as outside of the locomotive that meet persistent chemical or human waste provided in paragraph (b) of this otherwise applicable sanitation odors in the compartment. section, all lead locomotives in use shall standards, at frequent intervals during be equipped with a sanitation the course of their work shift, or the Washing system means a system for compartment. Each sanitation railroad shall arrange for enroute access use by railroad employees to maintain compartment shall be: to such facilities; personal cleanliness that includes a (1) Adequately ventilated; (v) Locomotives of tourist, scenic, secured sink or basin, water, (2) Equipped with a door that: historic, or excursion railroad antibacterial soap, and paper towels; or (i) Closes, and operations, which are otherwise covered antibacterial waterless soap and paper (ii) Possesses a modesty lock by [18 by this part because they are not towels; or antibacterial moist towelettes months after publication of the final propelled by steam power and operate and paper towels; or any other rule]; on the general railroad system of combination of suitable antibacterial (3) Equipped with a toilet facility, as transportation, but on which employees cleansing agents. defined in this part; have ready access to railroad-provided 3. Section 229.9 is amended by (4) Equipped with a washing system, sanitation facilities outside of the adding paragraph (g) to read as follows: as defined in this part, unless the locomotive, that meet otherwise railroad otherwise provides the washing § 229.9 Movement of non-complying applicable sanitation standards, at locomotives. system to employees upon reporting for frequent intervals during the course of duty or occupying the cab for duty, or their work shift; and * * * * * where the locomotive is equipped with (vi) Except as provided in § 229.14 of (g) Paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this a stationary sink that is located outside this part, control cab locomotives section shall not apply to sanitation of the sanitation compartment; designed for passenger occupancy and conditions covered by §§ 229.137 and (5) Equipped with toilet paper in used in intercity push-pull service that 229.139. Sections 229.137 and 229.139 sufficient quantity to meet employee are not equipped with sanitation set forth specific requirements for the needs, unless the railroad otherwise facilities, where employees have ready movement and repair of locomotives provides toilet paper to employees upon access to railroad-provided sanitation in with defective sanitation compartments. reporting for duty or occupying the cab other passenger cars on the train at 4. Section 229.21 is amended by for duty; and frequent intervals during the course of removing the fourth and fifth sentences (6) Equipped with a trash receptacle, their work shift. of paragraph (a) and adding in their unless the railroad otherwise provides (2) Paragraph (a)(3) of this section place three new sentences and by portable trash receptacles to employees shall not apply to: removing the fourth sentence of upon reporting for duty or occupying (i) Locomotives of a Class I railroad paragraph (b) and adding in its place the cab for duty. which, prior to [the effective date of this three new sentences to read as follows: (b) Exceptions. (1) Paragraph (a) of section], were equipped with a toilet this section shall not apply to: facility in which human waste falls via § 229.21 Daily inspection. (i) Locomotives engaged in commuter gravity to a holding tank where it is (a) * * * Except as provided in service or other short-haul passenger stored and periodically emptied, which §§ 229.9, 229.137, and 229.139, any service and commuter work trains on does not conform to the definition of conditions that constitute non- which employees have ready access to toilet facility set forth in this section. compliance with any requirement of railroad-provided sanitation facilities For these locomotives, the requirements this part shall be repaired before the outside of the locomotive or elsewhere of this section pertaining to the type of locomotive is used. Except with respect on the train, that meet otherwise toilet facilities required shall be to conditions that do not comply with applicable sanitation standards, at effective as these toilets become § 229.137 or § 229.139, a notation shall frequent intervals during the course of defective or are replaced with be made on the report indicating the their work shift; conforming units, whichever occurs nature of the repairs that have been (ii) Locomotives engaged in switching first. All other requirements set forth in made. Repairs made for conditions that service on which employees have ready this section shall apply to these do not comply with § 229.137 or access to railroad-provided sanitation locomotives as of June 3, 2002; and
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16051
(ii) With respect to the locomotives of locomotive, or the next daily inspection place the locomotive in trailing a Class I railroad which, prior to June 3, required by this part, whichever occurs position, in switching service as set 2002, were equipped with a sanitation first. forth in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this system other than the units addressed (d) Defective, unsanitary toilet facility; section, or in transfer service as set forth by paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section, use in trailing position. If the railroad in paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section. If that contains and removes human waste determines during the daily inspection the railroad determines during the daily by a method that does not conform with required by § 229.21 that a locomotive inspection required by § 229.21 that the the definition of toilet facility as set toilet facility is defective or is modesty lock required by paragraph forth in this section, the requirements of unsanitary, or both, the railroad may use (a)(2)(ii) of this section is defective, the this section pertaining to the type of the locomotive in trailing position. If the modesty lock shall be repaired pursuant toilet facilities shall apply on railroad places the locomotive in to the requirements of § 229.139(e). locomotives in use on July 1, 2003. trailing position, they shall not haul (i) Equipped units; retention and However, the Class I railroad subject to employees in the unit unless the maintenance. Except where a railroad this exception shall not deliver sanitation compartment is made downgrades a locomotive to service in locomotives with such sanitation sanitary prior to occupancy. If the toilet which it will never be occupied, where systems to other railroads for use, in the facility is defective and the unit a locomotive is equipped with a toilet lead position, during the time between becomes occupied, the railroad shall facility as of [the effective date of the June 3, 2002, and July 1, 2003. All other clearly mark the defective toilet facility final rule], the railroad shall retain and requirements set forth in this section as unavailable for use. maintain the toilet facility in the shall apply to the locomotives of this (e) Defective, sanitary toilet facility; locomotive consistent with the Class I railroad as of June 3, 2002. use in switching, transfer service. If the requirements of this part, including (c) Defective, unsanitary toilet facility; railroad determines during the daily locomotives used in switching service prohibition in lead position. Except as inspection required by § 229.21 that a pursuant to paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this provided in paragraphs (c)(1) through locomotive toilet facility is defective, section, and in transfer service pursuant (5) of this section, if the railroad but sanitary, the railroad may use the to paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section. locomotive in switching service, as set determines during the daily inspection (j) Newly manufactured units; in-cab forth in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this required by § 229.21 that a locomotive facilities. All locomotives manufactured section, or in transfer service, as set toilet facility is defective or is after June 3, 2002, except switching forth in paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this unsanitary, or both, the railroad shall units built exclusively for switching not use the locomotive in the lead section for a period not to exceed 10 service and locomotives built position. The railroad may continue to days. In this instance, the railroad shall exclusively for commuter service, shall use a lead locomotive with a toilet clearly mark the defective toilet facility be equipped with a sanitation facility that is defective or unsanitary as as unavailable for use. After expiration compartment accessible to cab of the daily inspection only where all of of the 10-day period, the locomotive employees without exiting to the out-of- the following conditions are met: shall be repaired or used in the trailing (1) The unsanitary or defective position. doors for use. No railroad may use a condition is discovered at a location (f) Lack of toilet paper, washing locomotive built after June 3, 2002, that where there are no other suitable system, trash receptacle. If the railroad does not comply with this subsection. locomotives available for use, ie., where determines during the daily inspection (k) Potable water. The railroad shall it is not possible to switch another required by § 229.21 that the lead utilize potable water where the washing locomotive into the lead position, or the locomotive is not equipped with toilet system includes the use of water. location is not equipped to clean the paper in sufficient quantity to meet § 229.139 Sanitation, servicing sanitation compartment if unsanitary or employee needs, or a washing system as requirements. required by paragraph (a)(4) of this repair the toilet facility if defective; (a) The sanitation compartment of (2) The locomotive, while section, or a trash receptacle as required each lead locomotive in use shall be noncompliant, did not pass through a by paragraph (a)(6) of this section, the sanitary. location where it could have been locomotive shall be equipped with these (b) All components required by cleaned if unsanitary, repaired if items prior to departure. § 229.137(a) for the lead locomotive in defective, or switched with another (g) Inadequate ventilation. If the use shall be present consistent with the compliant locomotive, since its last railroad determines during the daily requirements of this part, and shall daily inspection required by this part; inspection required by § 229.21 that the (3) Upon reasonable request of a sanitation compartment of the lead operate as intended such that: locomotive crewmember operating a locomotive in use is not adequately (1) All mechanical systems shall locomotive with a defective or ventilated as required by paragraph function; unsanitary toilet facility, the railroad (a)(1) of this section, the railroad shall (2) Water shall be present in sufficient arranges for access to a toilet facility repair the ventilation prior to departure, quantity to permit flushing; outside the locomotive that meets or place the locomotive in trailing (3) For those systems that utilize otherwise applicable sanitation position, in switching service as set chemicals for treatment, the chemical standards; forth in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this (chlorine or other comparable oxidizing (4) If the sanitation compartment is section, or in transfer service as set forth agent) used to treat waste must be unsanitary, the sanitation compartment in paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section. present; and door shall be closed and adequate (h) Door closure and modesty lock. If (4) No blockage is present that ventilation shall be provided in the cab the railroad determines during the daily prevents waste from evacuating the so that it is habitable; and inspection required by § 229.21 that the bowl. (5) The locomotive shall not continue sanitation compartment on the lead (c) The sanitation compartment of in service in the lead position beyond a locomotive is not equipped with a door each occupied locomotive used in location where the defective or that closes, as required by paragraph switching service pursuant to unsanitary condition can be corrected or (a)(2)(i) of this section, the railroad shall § 229.137(b)(1)(ii), in transfer service replaced with another compliant repair the door prior to departure, or pursuant to § 229.137(b)(1)(iii), or in a
VerDate 11
trailing position when the locomotive is date on which the defective toilet is defective, the railroad shall repair the occupied, shall be sanitary. facility became defective. The date on modesty lock on or before the next 92- (d) Where the railroad uses a which the toilet facility becomes day inspection required by this part. locomotive pursuant to § 229.137(e) in defective shall be entered on the daily 6. Appendix B of part 229 is amended switching or transfer service with a inspection report. by adding entries for §§ 229.137 and defective toilet facility, such use shall (e) Where it is determined that the 229.139 to the Schedule of Civil not exceed 10 calendar days from the modesty lock required by § 229.137(a)(2) Penalties to read as follows:
APPENDIX B TO PART 229.—SCHEDULE OF CIVIL PENALTIES
Section Violation Willful viola- tion 1
*******
Subpart C—Safety Requirements
******* 229.137 Sanitation, general: (a) Sanitation compartment in lead unit, complete failure to provide required items ...... $5,000 $10,000 (1) Ventilation ...... 2,500 5,000 (2) Door missing ...... 2,000 4,000 (2)(i) Door doesn’t close ...... 1,000 2,000 (2)(ii) No modesty lock ...... 1,000 2,000 (3) Not equipped with toilet in lead ...... 5,000 10,000 (4) Not equipped with washing system ...... 1,000 2,000 (5) Lack of paper ...... 1,000 2,000 (6) Lack of trash receptacle ...... 1,000 2,000 (b) Exceptions: (1)(i) Commuter service, failure to meet conditions of exception ...... 2,500 5,000 (1)(ii) Switching service, failure to meet conditions of exception ...... 2,500 5,000 (1)(iii) Transfer service, failure to meet conditions of exception ...... 2,500 5,000 (1)(iv) Class III, failure to meet conditions of exception ...... 2,500 5,000 (1)(v) Tourist, failure to meet conditions of exception ...... 2,500 5,000 (1)(vi) Control cab locomotive, failure to meet conditions of exception ...... 2,500 5,000 (2) Noncompliant toilet ...... 5,000 10,000 (c) Defective/unsanitary toilet in lead unit ...... 2,500 5,000 (1–5) Failure to meet conditions of exception ...... 2,500 5,000 (d) Defective/unsanitary unit; failure to meet conditions for trailing position ...... 2,500 5,000 (e) Defective/sanitary unit; failure to meet conditions for switching/transfer service ...... 2,500 5,000 (f) Paper, washing, trash holder; failure to equip prior to departure ...... 2,500 5,000 (g) Inadequate ventilation; failure to repair or move prior to departure ...... 2,500 5,000 (h) Door closure/modesty lock; failure to repair or move ...... 1,000 2,000 (i) Failure to retain/maintain of equipped units ...... 2,500 5,000 (j) Failure to equip new units/in-cab facility ...... 2,500 5,000 (k) Failure to provide potable water ...... 2,500 5,000 229.139 Servicing requirements: (a) Lead occupied unit not sanitary ...... 2,500 5,000 (b) Components not present/operating ...... 2,500 5,000 (c) Occupied unit in switching, transfer service, in trailing position not sanitary ...... 2,500 5,000 (d) Defective unit used more than 10 days ...... 2,500 5,000 (e) Failure to repair defective modesty lock ...... 1,000 2,000
* * * * * DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION trucks manufactured in the 2004 model Issued in Washington, DC, on March 22, year. Chapter 329 of Title 49 of the National Highway Traffic Safety 2002. United States Code requires the Administration issuance of this standard. The standard Allan Rutter, for all light trucks manufactured by a Administrator. 49 CFR Part 533 manufacturer is set at 20.7 mpg for the [FR Doc. 02–8077 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] 2004 model year. [Docket No. NHTSA–2001–11048] BILLING CODE 4910–06–P DATES: The amendment is effective May RIN 2127–AI68 6, 2002. Petitions for reconsideration must be submitted within 30 days of Light Truck Average Fuel Economy publication. Standard, Model Year 2004 ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration ACTION: Final rule. should be submitted to: Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety SUMMARY: This final rule establishes the Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW., average fuel economy standard for light Washington, DC 20590.
VerDate 11
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For to issue light truck fuel economy standards. This proposed standard non-legal issues, call Ken Katz, Office of standards for each model year. reflected the absence of any current Planning and Consumer Programs, at Standards are required to be set at least information or analysis regarding the (202) 366–0846, facsimile (202) 493– 18 months prior to the beginning of the impact of any change in CAFE standards 2290, electronic mail model year. The Act provides that the and the capabilities of manufacturers. [email protected]. For legal issues, fuel economy standards are to be set at We nonetheless invited comments on call Otto Matheke, Office of the Chief the maximum feasible average fuel the maximum feasible level of average Counsel, at 202–366–5263. economy level. In determining fuel economy, including comments as to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: maximum feasible average fuel economy whether motor vehicle manufacturers level, the Secretary is required under could, with the limited leadtime Table of Contents section 32902(f) of the Act to consider available and product plans essentially four factors: technological feasibility; established, achieve a level higher than I. Background II. Summary of Decision economic practicability; the effect of 20.7 mpg in MY 2004. III. Comments in Response to the NPRM other Federal motor vehicle standards We note that on February 7, 2002, we IV. Technological Feasibility on fuel economy; and the need of the published in the Federal Register (67 V. Effect of Other Federal Standards on Fuel nation to conserve energy. (The FR 5767) a request for comments Economy Secretary of Transportation delegated relating to a variety of issues concerning A. Safety Standards responsibility for the automotive fuel fuel economy improvements for MY 1. FMVSS 138 economy program to the Administrator 2005–2010. The purpose of this request 2. FMVSS 201 of NHTSA (41 FR 25015, June 22, is to acquire detailed information to 3. FMVSS 225 1976)). assist the agency in developing a 4. FMVSS 139 From 1995 until very recently, the proposal for model years beyond 2004. B. Emissions Standards 1. Tier II Requirements standards-setting process for light truck In that document, we also requested 2. Onboard Vapor Recovery CAFE standards was affected by comments concerning the recent 3. Supplemental Federal Test Procedure restrictions imposed in the Department National Academy of Sciences (NAS) 4. California Air Resources Board LEV II of Transportation’s annual study on the effectiveness and impact of 5. Section 177 States Appropriations Acts. These Acts CAFE standards. Through the request VI. The Need of the Nation to Conserve provided that none of the funds were for comments and other means we Energy available to prepare, propose, or anticipate preparing the customary VII. Economic Practicability promulgate any regulations prescribing detailed factual and analytical VIII. Determining the Maximum Feasible Average Fuel Economy Level CAFE standards in any model year that foundation for establishing fuel A. Interpretation of ‘‘Feasible’’ differed from standards previously economy standards in future years. B. Industry-wide Considerations promulgated. This meant that the In response to the January 24, 2002 C. Petroleum Consumption agency was unable to spend any funds NPRM concerning the MY 2004 light D. The 2004 model year Standard for the collection and analysis of data truck CAFE standard, the agency IX. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices relating to CAFE levels. During this time received comments from General Motors A. Economic Impacts period, the agency established the (GM), Ford, DaimlerChrysler (DC), the B. Environmental Impacts required light truck CAFE standards at National Automobile Dealers C. Energy Impacts the level of 20.7 mpg, the level of the Association (NADA), a number of public D. Impacts on Small Entities interest groups, including Public E. Federalism last light truck CAFE standard it had F. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act previously promulgated under the usual Citizen, and one religious organization. G. Paperwork Reduction Act statutory criteria. Because we had no II. Summary of Decision H. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) other course of action, we determined I. Plain Language that issuing notices of proposed Based on our analysis, we are J. Executive Order 13045 rulemaking (NPRMs) during this time establishing an average fuel economy K. National Technology Transfer and period was unnecessary and contrary to standard of 20.7 mpg for MY 2004 light Advancement Act the public interest. trucks. As we indicated in the NPRM, L. Department of Energy Review On July 10, 2001, U.S. Secretary of we were precluded from collecting and Transportation Mineta sent a letter to analyzing information regarding I. Background Congress requesting that the Department potential changes in fuel economy In December 1975, during the be allowed to begin the rulemaking standards from 1995 to mid-December aftermath of the energy crisis created by process for future CAFE standards 2001. This factor, along with the the oil embargo of 1973–74, Congress immediately. The restrictions ended statutory requirement to issue the 2004 enacted the Energy Policy and with the enactment of the Department of model year standard not less than 18 Conservation Act. Congress included a Transportation and Related Agencies months before the model year begins, provision in that Act establishing an Appropriations Act for FY 2002. limited the information we were able to automotive fuel economy regulatory However, this did not take place until gather and the analysis we were able to program. That provision added a new December 18, 2001, a time so close to perform in setting the MY 2004 title, title V, ‘‘Improving Automotive the April 1, 2002 date by which the MY standard. Additionally, we note that the Efficiency,’’ to the Motor Vehicle 2004 light truck CAFE standard must be relatively short leadtime for the 2004 Information and Cost Saving Act (the issued as to preclude the agency from model year precludes significant Act). Title V provides for the preparing the customary detailed factual changes beyond those that establishment of average fuel economy and analytical foundation for a CAFE manufacturers have already planned. standards for cars and light trucks. Title rulemaking. In evaluating manufacturers’ fuel V has been codified without substantive On January 24, 2002, we published in economy capabilities for the 2004 model change as Chapter 329 of Title 49 of the the Federal Register (67 FR 3470) an year, we have been largely restricted to United States Code. NPRM to establish the MY 2004 light publicly available information, the Section 32902(a) of Chapter 329 truck fuel economy standard at 20.7 information contained in the requires the Secretary of Transportation mpg, the level of the MY 1996–2003 manufacturer comments submitted in
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16054 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
response to the NPRM, and the the standard cited a number of reasons Tapping Automaker Ingenuity to Build information contained in comments in support of an increase, including Safe and Efficient Automobiles,’’ Public submitted by other interested parties. As environmental, energy and national Citizen argued that drivetrain the agency was foreclosed until mid- security concerns. Approximately 15 of improvements, reductions in parasitic December 2001 from collecting the the commenters specifically mentioned losses, decreased rolling resistance and detailed information regarding the events of September 11th and other new technologies could be applied manufacturer capabilities and product reliance on imported petroleum as to improve efficiency. Even in the short capabilities that are required to perform support for increasing CAFE levels. term, according to Public Citizen, small an in-depth analysis of manufacturer Private individuals who did not support gains could be made if optional capabilities, future product plans, and an increase in the light truck fuel equipment was removed from vehicles the measures that can be implemented economy standard indicated their belief that are using increasingly efficient to improve fuel economy that are that increases in light truck fuel engines and transmissions. In addition, normally examined in the process of economy would result in decreased although acknowledging that NHTSA establishing fuel economy standards, safety, reduced utility of light vehicles, had been constrained by Congress in the much of our analysis is based on the a reduced number of available light past, Public Citizen contended that the comments submitted by vehicle trucks, and prevent vehicle agency proposal represented an manufacturers. Nonetheless, we have manufacturers from providing abdication of the agency’s statutory duty analyzed the information available to us sufficiently powerful vehicles to serve to set fuel economy standards at the and applied the four factors we are as tow vehicles and work trucks. maximum feasible level. required by statute to consider in Among the trade associations, public The comments submitted by DC, Ford determining the maximum feasible fuel interest, and religious groups submitting and GM all supported the agency’s economy level for the 2004 model year. comments, three—NADA, FOF, and proposal. DC stated it agreed that SBSC—agreed with the proposed 2004 NHTSA did not, in the case of the 2004 III. Comments in Response to the standard or advocated a lower standard. NPRM light truck standard, have sufficient The FOF and SBSC cited safety time to collect and analyze any new NHTSA received approximately 130 concerns and the economic effects of data. The company also indicated that public comments in response to the raising the standard beyond 20.7 mpg as the design and configuration of its NPRM. Private citizens submitted the support for not increasing the standard. product line for the 2004 model year overwhelming majority of these In addition, FOF stated that Americans could not be modified to add any comments. As indicated above, Ford, living in rural areas have a particular technologies to improve fuel efficiency. GM, and DC submitted comments. need for sufficiently large and powerful In addition, DC strongly supported While these manufacturers produce the trucks for work, farming and recreation. extension of the dual-fuel vehicle credit majority of light trucks sold in the NADA argued that increasing the program and noted that the continuation United States, a number of other light standard would also cause economic of this program would have an impact truck producers, including Nissan and hardship and would conflict with on the company’s ability to meet the Toyota, did not submit comments. consumer demand for larger and more 2004 model year standard. Finally, Similarly, smaller light truck powerful vehicles. manufacturers, who would also be Public Citizen and EMSC disagreed citing the National Academy of Sciences affected by the 2004 model year with the agency’s proposal. EMSC CAFE report, DC stated that any standard, did not provide comments. argued that small increases in fuel modifications to the existing standard of Comments were also received from the economy are technologically feasible 20.7 mpg would have to be based on a National Automobile Dealers and desirable. In particular, EMSC realistic assessment of the lead time Association (NADA), Public Citizen, argued that hybrid technology used in needed by vehicle manufacturers to Frontiers of Freedom (FOF), The Small cars could be applied to light trucks. institute design changes to improve fuel Business Survival Committee (SBSC) Public Citizen argued that the auto economy. Given what was described as and The Environmental Ministries of industry has the capacity to sell a fleet an inability to accommodate any change Southern California (EMSC). with an average fuel economy well in the 2004 light truck fuel economy Most of the commenters supported above the current standard, even within standard, DC stated that any changes to establishing the 2004 light truck the time constraints imposed by the the light truck CAFE standard would standard at a higher level than the 20.7 rulemaking process. In support of this have a severe financial impact and mpg level proposed in the NPRM. argument, Public Citizen stated that, in could cause the company to reduce Individuals submitted the majority of July 2000, Ford announced that it product offerings, close plants, and lay- the comments supporting a higher planned to improve the average fuel off workers. standard. Many of these individual economy of its SUV fleet by 25 percent Ford also supported the agency’s commenters also supported higher by 2005. Public Citizen also stated that proposal, arguing that 20.7 mpg is the CAFE standards for passenger cars as General Motors and DC echoed that maximum feasible light truck CAFE well, advocated a single standard for pledge. Assuming that the industry was standard for the 2004 model year. Ford cars and trucks to close what was continuing to adhere to those pledges, concurred in NHTSA’s assertion that commonly referred to as the ‘‘SUV Public Citizen stated that manufacturers events did not leave the agency in a Loophole,’’ and cited the existence of could comply with a 2004 standard position to collect and analyze any new hybrid vehicles and other technological above 20.7 mpg and advocated that the data. Moreover, Ford stated that its 2004 developments as evidence that agency set it at 21.5 mpg or, in the product plans are now fixed and that it manufacturers can achieve higher light alternative, at 20.9 mpg. would be impossible to add any fuel truck CAFE levels. Some of these Public Citizen stated that certain economy related technology to its 2004 commenters suggested specific CAFE technological improvements could be vehicles. The company also stated that levels for MY 2004, while others made that would improve fuel any increase in CAFE standards for the suggested future levels and the efficiency. Citing suggestions made by 2004 model year would degrade Ford’s timeframe for achieving these levels. the Union of Concerned Scientists financial health and cause them to Individuals advocating an increase in (UCS) in its report ‘‘Drilling in Detroit— reduce product offerings.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16055
GM also stated that it could not increasing consumer demand for larger, V. Effect of Other Federal Standards on achieve a light truck CAFE higher than heavier, and more powerful vehicles Fuel Economy 20.7 mpg in the 2004 model year. In impacted on any assumptions that these In determining the maximum feasible fact, GM said that it projects that the pledges may have been based on. None fuel economy level, the agency must average fuel economy of its 2004 light of those manufacturers discussed the take into consideration the potential truck fleet will be lower than 20.7 mpg, status of the pledges about SUV fuel effects of other Federal standards. The if CAFE credits resulting from its dual economy in their comments. However, following section discusses other fuel vehicles are excluded. It did not, all of the manufacturers responding to government regulations, both in process however, quantify the possible shortfall the NPRM indicated that the maximum and recently completed, that may have or explain the reasons for it. As is the level of average fuel economy for all of an impact on fuel economy capability. case with the other manufacturers their light trucks, not just their SUVs, submitting comments, GM stated that its for the 2004 model year would be 20.7 A. Safety Standards product lines and final designs for the mpg. 1. FMVSS 138 2004 model year are already fixed and NHTSA does not possess the not susceptible to change. GM also information required to analyze or On July 26, 2001, NHTSA published stated that it believed that sufficient question the assertions made by Ford, in the Federal Register (66 FR 38982) a time did not exist for NHTSA to gather DC, and GM that the maximum average notice of proposed rulemaking data and perform analysis sufficient to fuel economy their light truck fleets can containing a proposal to require tire show that a standard higher than 20.7 achieve in the 2004 model year is 20.7 pressure monitoring systems on mpg is feasible. GM contrasted the mpg. As already noted, NHTSA lacks passenger cars, multipurpose vehicles, limited information in the record for detailed information on the extent to trucks, and buses with a gross vehicle this rulemaking with the extensive which the manufacturers are using the weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less. information that NHTSA recently various available fuel efficiency This proposal was issued in response to requested to aid it in addressing the improving technologies in their current a requirement contained in the light truck fuel economy standards for light truck models and the extent to Transportation Recall Enhancement, the 2005–2010 model years. (67 FR which they plan to use them in the 2004 Accountability and Documentation Act 5767) model year. Many commenters of 2000 (TREAD). The TREAD Act indicated a belief that manufacturers further requires that the tire pressure IV. Technological Feasibility could achieve a higher level through the monitoring system requirements take One of the factors that Section implementation of new technologies. effect two years after the final rule is 32902(f) directs NHTSA to consider in However, NHTSA does not have the issued. Although NHTSA has not yet establishing fuel economy standards is information necessary to determine if issued this final rule, it anticipates the technological feasibility of the manufacturers can incorporate these doing so in the near future. Therefore, improvements in fuel efficiency that are technologies into their MY 2004 light the tire pressure monitoring system required for manufacturers to meet that trucks given the short leadtime. requirements will apply to 2004 model standard. As NHTSA has been In fact, all the manufacturers stated year light trucks. In its Preliminary foreclosed from collecting detailed that one constraint on their ability to Regulatory Evaluation for the tire information regarding manufacturer improve fuel economy was the lack of pressure monitoring system rulemaking, capabilities, it may only consider the leadtime for implementing the agency estimated weight increases potential for technological improvements in fuel economy. The per vehicle associated with tire pressure improvements in a general fashion. As agency recognizes, as it has in the past, monitoring systems as being not more a number of commenters have that the leadtime necessary to design than one pound. As this weight increase indicated, there are a number of tools and test components to implement is negligible, the tire pressure technologies that offer promise for gains a technological advance once the monitoring system requirements are not in fuel efficiency. These include hybrid- technology is deemed to be feasible is likely to have any CAFE impact. electric drive trains, integrated starter- not less than 30 to 36 months (See 59 We note that correct tire pressure generators, variable valve timing, FR 16313, April 6, 1994). This is further improves a vehicle’s fuel economy. improved combustion management, complicated by the long model lives of Thus, the addition of tire pressure aerodynamic improvements, reductions vehicles in the light truck segment. The monitoring systems will improve real in friction losses, and advanced lack of available leadtime before the world fuel economy by warning drivers transmissions, including continuously beginning of the 2004 model year about tires that are significantly variable transmissions (CVT’s). indicates that most, if not all, potential underinflated. This will not result in a In the absence of detailed information improvements in fuel efficiency that are CAFE improvement for manufacturers, from vehicle manufacturers, including not already designed into 2004 models however, as a vehicle’s fuel economy for proprietary information that is not could not now be used in these vehicles. CAFE purposes is determined by a otherwise available, the agency is Public Citizen also suggested that detailed test procedure that includes unable to determine which, if any, of rather than use improvements in fuel specifications for tire pressure. these technologies are included in efficiency to decrease fuel consumption, future product plans and either could or manufacturers have taken the 2. FMVSS 201 would be incorporated in 2004 model opportunity to increase vehicle weight On April 5, 2000, NHTSA published year trucks. NHTSA is aware, as Public and content to boost sales and increase in the Federal Register (65 FR 17482) an Citizen pointed out in its comments, profits. If, as Public Citizen suggests, NPRM proposing to modify test that Ford and other manufacturers short-term gains in fuel economy could procedures and to extend the upper pledged in 2000 to voluntarily improve be gained by basing increases in the fuel interior impact requirements of FMVSS SUV fuel efficiency by MY 2005. economy standard on the removal of 201 to certain door frames and seat belt NHTSA does not know precisely which optional equipment, NHTSA has not mounting structures to passenger car, combination of measures these had sufficient time or information to trucks, multipurpose vehicles, and manufacturers contemplated using to assess the feasibility, practicability or buses with a GVWR of 10,000 pounds or meet this pledge or the degree to which effectiveness of such an approach. less. The agency proposal specified that
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16056 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
the new requirements would become light truck fuel economy standard. The (NMOG), consisting primarily of effective 180 days after publication of a FMVSS 225 requirements are intended hydrocarbons (HC) and contributing to final rule. The proposed extension to reduce deaths and injuries to children ambient volatile organic compounds would require that certain vertical by providing a more effective and (VOC). The program also applies the surfaces on doors of vehicles with doors standardized means of attaching child same set of federal standards to all that close together without an restraints. The agency’s Final Economic passenger cars, light trucks, and intervening pillar and vertical seat belt Analysis prepared at the time of the medium-duty passenger vehicles. Under mounting structures meet the same issuance of the March 5, 1999 final rule the Tier 2 standards, light trucks impact requirements applicable to the estimated that compliance with the new include ‘‘light light-duty trucks’’ (or pillars found on more conventional child restraint anchorage requirements LLDTs), rated at less than 6000 pounds designs. would result in a weight increase of one gross vehicle weight and ‘‘heavy light- The agency has not yet issued a final pound per vehicle. Accordingly, the duty trucks’’ (or HLDTs), rated at more rule. Comments received in response to agency determined that compliance than 6000 pounds gross vehicle weight. the NPRM suggested that the proposed would have a negligible impact on For new passenger cars and light LDTs, effective date did not provide sufficient vehicle fuel economy. the Tier 2 standards phase-in beginning leadtime for manufacturers to respond in 2004, and are to be fully phased-in by to the new requirements. This request 4. FMVSS 139 2007. During the phase-in period from for additional leadtime is presently On March 5, 2002, NHTSA published 2004–2007, all passenger cars and light under consideration by the agency. in the Federal Register (67 FR 10050) a LDTs not certified to the primary Tier 2 Although no determination has yet been notice of proposed rulemaking standards must meet an interim made regarding this issue, the extension containing the agency’s proposal for a standard equivalent to the current of the impact requirements to door new FMVSS establishing performance National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) frames and seat belt mounting structures requirements for tires. The agency’s standards for light duty vehicles. In could become effective before or during proposal was issued pursuant to a addition to establishing new emissions the 2004 model year. The safety mandate in the TREAD Act requiring standards for vehicles, the Tier 2 countermeasures required to meet the that it issue new performance standards standards also establish standards for upper interior impact requirements of for tires on or before June 1, 2002. These the sulfur content of gasoline. FMVSS 201 do not impose a significant tire performance requirements, which When issuing the Tier 2 standards, weight penalty. The agency’s estimate of would appear in FMVSS 139 and would EPA responded to comments regarding the additional weight required to meet apply to new pneumatic tires for use on the impact of the Tier 2 standard and its the requirements of Standard 201 vehicles with a gross vehicle weight impact on CAFE by indicating that it contained in the Final Economic rating of 10,000 pounds or less. The believed that the Tier 2 standards would Assessment prepared at the time of the agency’s proposal sets forth two not have an adverse effect on fuel issuance of the final rule establishing alternative phase-in schedules for these economy. NHTSA notes that only one of the upper interior requirements (60 FR new requirements. Under one of these the commenters responding to the 43031) estimated an increase in total phase-ins, tires on MY 2004 light trucks agency’s proposed 2004 light truck vehicle weight of 2.29 to 5.59 pounds would have to meet the performance standard indicated that the Tier 2 for installation of countermeasures in requirements of the standard. The standards would have any impact on the the entire vehicle. As the proposed proposed performance requirements for ability to meet fuel economy standards. extension of these requirements to door tires could have an impact on fuel DC, while addressing its strong support frames and seat belt mounting structures economy if meeting the requirements for continuation of the dual-fuel applies only to these discrete altered the rolling resistance of these incentive program, stated that the Tier components rather than the entire upper tires. However, there is no present 2 standards presented special challenges interior, the weight penalty associated indication that the proposed for ethanol-fueled vehicles. The with installing countermeasures on performance requirements will have any comments, did not, however, indicate these structures would be less than one such impact. Accordingly, the agency the nature of these challenges and the pound per vehicle. This added weight believes that this proposal would have degree to which the Tier 2 standards will have a minimal impact on vehicle a minimal impact on the ability of would impact on DC’s ability to meet fuel economy. manufacturers to comply with the 2004 the proposed 2004 light truck standard. 3. FMVSS 225 light truck fuel economy standard. 2. Onboard Vapor Recovery On March 5, 1999, NHTSA published B. Emissions Standards On April 6, 1994, EPA published in in the Federal Register (64 FR 10786) a the Federal Register a final rule (59 FR final rule establishing a new safety 1. Tier II Requirements 16262) controlling vehicle refueling standard requiring the installation of On February 10, 2000, the emissions through the use of onboard dedicated child restraint anchorage Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) systems in passenger cars, multipurpose published in the Federal Register (65 vehicle-based systems. These vehicles, and trucks with a GVWR of FR 6698) a final rule establishing new requirements applied to light-duty 8,500 pounds or less and buses with a federal emissions standards for vehicles vehicles beginning in the 1998 model GVWR of 10,000 pounds or less. On July classified by EPA as passenger cars, year, and were phased-in over three 31, 2000, NHTSA published a response light trucks and larger passenger model years. The ORVR requirements to petitions for reconsideration of the vehicles. These new emissions also apply to light-duty trucks with a March 5, 1999 final rule that extended standards, known as Tier 2 standards, gross vehicle weight rating of 0–6000 the effective date of the new anchorage are designed to focus on reducing the lbs, beginning in model year 2001 and requirements to September 1, 2004. emissions most responsible for the phasing-in over three model years at the Because model years for CAFE purposes ozone and particulate matter (PM) same rate as for light-duty vehicles. For begin on October 1, these new impact from these vehicles. These light-duty trucks with a gross vehicle requirements would apply to vehicles emissions are nitrogen oxides (NO[X]) weight rating of 6001–8500 lbs, the that must meet the 2004 model year and non-methane organic gases ORVR requirements first apply in the
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16057
2004 model year and phase-in over pounds or lower are subject to the same much of it coming from the Persian Gulf three model years at the same rate as low-emission vehicle standards as region. EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook light-duty vehicles. passenger cars. LEV II requirements also 2002 estimates that this oil importation None of the commenters addressed include more stringent emission will increase to 62 percent by the year the impact, if any, of the ORVR standards for passenger car and light- 2020. EIA projects that Persian Gulf requirements on compliance with duty truck LEVs and ultra low emission producers are expected to account for CAFE. The ORVR requirements impose vehicles (ULEVs), and establish phase- more than 45 percent of worldwide a weight penalty on vehicles as they in requirements that begin in 2004. trade by 2002, for the first time since the necessitate the installation of vapor During the initial year of the four-year 1980’s. After 2002, the Persian Gulf recovery canisters and associated tubing phase-in, the LEV II standards require share of worldwide petroleum exports is and hardware. However, the operation that 25 percent of production comply. projected to increase gradually to almost of the ORVR system results in fuel Comments submitted by DC indicated 48 percent by 2020. vapors being made available to the that company’s concern that compliance engine for combustion while the vehicle with LEV II requirements may be VII. Economic Practicability is being operated. As these vapors difficult for dual-fuel vehicles. The The agency’s traditional interpretation provide an additional source of energy company, did not, however, provide any of the requirement to consider that would otherwise be lost to the details or data regarding these ‘‘economic practicability’’ in deciding atmosphere through evaporation, the challenges. maximum feasible average fuel economy ORVR requirements do not have a is that the agency must set standards 5. Section 177 States negative impact on fuel economy. that are within the financial capability The term ‘‘Section 177 States’’ refers of the industry, and not so stringent as 3. Supplemental Federal Test Procedure to states that voluntarily adopt the more to threaten substantial economic On October 26, 1996, EPA issued a stringent California emissions hardship for the industry (42 FR 33537). final rule (61 FR 54852) revising the standards. As of November 2000, Since GM, Ford and DC, whose tailpipe emission portions of the Federal Massachusetts, New York and Maine production represents over 80 percent of Test Procedure (FTP) for light-duty had adopted the California Low the light truck market, did not object to vehicles (LDVs) and light-duty trucks Emission Vehicle (LEV) program. the setting of the model year 2004 light (LDTs). The revision created a NHTSA has not received any data truck standard at 20.7 mpg, the agency Supplemental Federal Test Procedure showing any impact on the 2004 light concludes that a standard set at that (SFTP) designed to address truck fuel economy capabilities as a level would be economically shortcomings with the existing FTP in result of states other than California practicable. the representation of aggressive (high adopting the California emissions GM, Ford and DC indicated that they speed and/or high acceleration) driving standards. could not meet any standard higher than behavior, rapid speed fluctuations, 20.7 mpg without suffering economic driving behavior following startup, and VI. The Need of the Nation To Conserve Energy effects. Unfortunately, due to the unique use of air conditioning. The SFTP also circumstances of this rulemaking, contains requirements designed to more Since the petroleum ‘‘shocks’’ of the NHTSA is not now in a position to accurately reflect real road forces on the 1970s, the inflation-adjusted price of determine the point at which those test dynamometer. EPA chose to apply crude oil has generally declined. After economic effects would amount to a the SFTP requirements to trucks the oil shocks of the 1970s, several substantial economic hardship. In the through a phase-in. Light-duty trucks events have combined to keep oil prices absence of the information needed to with a gross vehicle weight rating low, including a diminution in the make such a determination, the agency (GVWR) up to 6000 lbs were subject to market power of OPEC due to an concludes that establishing the standard a three-year phase-in ending in the 2002 increase in petroleum production from above 20.7 mpg could create a risk of model year. Heavy light-duty trucks, non-OPEC nations. However, there also such substantial hardship. those with a GVWR greater than 6000 has been a growing dependence of the lbs but not greater than 8500 lbs, are U.S. on imported petroleum since that VIII. Determining the Maximum subject to a phase-in in which 40 time period. Feasible Average Fuel Economy Level percent of each manufacturer’s Based on information collected by the As discussed above, section 32902(f) production must meet the SFTP Energy Information Administration requires that light truck fuel economy requirements in the 2002 model year, 80 (EIA) in 2001, world crude oil reserves standards be set at the maximum percent in 2003, and 100 percent in the amount to about 1,000 billion barrels, feasible average fuel economy level. In 2004 model year. and world natural gas reserves amount making this determination, the agency The 2004 model year represents the to about 5,180 trillion cubic feet. Of this must consider the four factors of section final phase-in year for light trucks total, the Middle East controls about 65 32902(f): technological feasibility, subject to CAFE standards. Neither percent of the world’s oil reserves and economic practicability, the effect of Ford, GM or DC indicated in their about 35 percent of the world’s natural other Federal motor vehicle standards comments that the SFTP would have gas reserves (the former U.S.S.R. on fuel economy, and the need of the any impact on their ability to meet the controls another 38 percent of the nation to conserve energy. proposed 2004 standard. world’s natural gas reserves). North American reserves of oil amount to just A. Interpretation of ‘‘Feasible’’ 4. California Air Resources Board LEV II 5–6 percent of world reserves, and Based on definitions and judicial The State of California Low Emission North American reserves of natural gas interpretations of similar language in Vehicle II regulations (LEV II) will apply amount to about 5 percent of world other statutes, the agency has in the past to passenger cars and light trucks in the reserves. interpreted ‘‘feasible’’ to refer to 2004 model year. The LEV II Today, the Persian Gulf region holds whether something is capable of being amendments restructure the light-duty about two-thirds of the entire world’s done. The agency has thus concluded in truck category so that trucks with a known oil reserves. The U.S. imports the past that a standard set at the gross vehicle weight rating of 8,500 more than 53 percent of its petroleum— maximum feasible average fuel economy
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16058 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
level must: (1) be capable of being done while Ford had about 35 percent. 45 FR higher standard against the relatively and (2) be at the highest level that is 81593, 81599, December 11, 1980. certain difficulties of manufacturers capable of being done, taking account of facing a higher standard. C. Petroleum Consumption what manufacturers are able to do in A 20.7 mpg standard will not unduly light of technological feasibility, The potential savings associated with restrict consumer choice or have economic practicability, how other a 2004 light truck standard above 20.7 adverse economic impacts on the large Federal motor vehicle standards affect mpg are highly uncertain. Assuming domestic manufacturers. The comments average fuel economy, and the need of that a standard could be set at 21.2 mpg, of GM, DC and Ford all supported the nation to conserve energy. 0.5 mpg above the capability asserted by setting the 2004 model year light truck GM, Ford and DC, these three CAFE standard at 20.7 mpg. NHTSA B. Industry-wide Considerations companies, whose sales represent believes that the 20.7 mpg standard The statute does not expressly state approximately 80 percent of all the light minimizes the risk of the potentially whether the concept of feasibility is to trucks sold in the United States, could serious adverse economic consequences be determined on a manufacturer-by- likely meet the level of the standard for the domestic automobile industry manufacturer basis or on an industry- only by restricting the sales of their that could result from a higher standard wide basis. Legislative history may be larger or more powerful light trucks. If precipitously set on the basis of limited used as an indication of congressional this occurred, consumers might tend to information. The cost of avoiding this intent in resolving ambiguities in keep their older, less-fuel-efficient light risk is, insofar as the 2004 model year statutory language. The agency believes trucks in service longer. Also, is concerned, foregoing any increased that the below-quoted language provides consumers might purchase larger, petroleum savings that might have been guidance on the meaning of ‘‘maximum heavier trucks that are not subject to realized from more fuel-efficient light feasible average fuel economy level.’’ CAFE standards. Therefore, the agency truck production in that model year. The Conference Report to the 1975 Act believes that any additional energy The agency concludes, in view of the (S. Rep. No. 94–516, 94th Cong., 1st savings associated with alternative statutory requirement to consider Sess. 154–55 (1975)) states: higher fuel economy standards above specified factors, that the relatively 20.7 mpg (the level the agency has Such determination [of maximum feasible small and very uncertain energy savings average fuel economy level] should take determined to be the capability of GM, associated with setting a standard above industry-wide considerations into account. Ford and DC) for model year 2004 20.7 mpg would not justify the potential For example, a determination of maximum would be uncertain and speculative. harm to the industry and the economy feasible average fuel economy should not be D. The 2004 Model Year Standard as a whole. keyed to the single manufacturer which FOF and SBSC stated that NHTSA might have the most difficulty achieving a Based on its analysis described above should consider the safety effects of any given level of average fuel economy. Rather, and on manufacturers’ projections decision to increase fuel economy the Secretary must weigh the benefits to the contained in the comments submitted in standards. Although the agency is not nation of a higher average fuel economy response to the January 24, 2002 NPRM, standard against the difficulties of individual increasing the light truck fuel economy the agency concludes that the major manufacturers. Such difficulties, however, standard for 2004 above the standard for domestic manufacturers can achieve a should be given appropriate weight in setting prior years, NHTSA has recognized that light truck fuel economy level of 20.7 the standard in light of the small number of CAFE standards could adversely affect domestic manufacturers that currently exist mpg. and the possible implications for the national Ford, DC and GM dominate that safety to the extent that they necessitate economy and for reduced competition domestic light truck market with significant reductions in car size and/or association [sic] with a severe strain on any approximately 80 percent of all sales. weight. This issue was discussed at manufacturer * * *. Other light truck manufacturers, such as length in the agency’s notice It is clear from the Conference Report Nissan, Toyota, Honda, BMW and terminating rulemaking on the MY 1990 that Congress did not intend that others are expected in MY 2004 to have passenger car CAFE standard (see 58 FR standards simply be set at the level of CAFE levels both above and below Ford, 6939, February 3, 1993). As the least capable manufacturer. Rather, DC and GM. However, since these recommended in the NAS report, NHTSA must take industry-wide companies have a small market share, NHTSA is currently updating its 1997 considerations into account in NHTSA concludes that setting a analysis on the relationship between determining the maximum feasible standard based on their capabilities vehicle size and safety. This study will average fuel economy level. would be inconsistent with a be completed later this year. NHTSA has traditionally set light determination of maximum feasibility Given that this final rule maintains truck standards at a level that can be that takes industry-wide considerations the light truck CAFE standard at 20.7 achieved by manufacturers whose into account, as required by statute. mpg, it will not have any impact on vehicles constitute a substantial share of Under the time constraints imposed safety. the market. The agency did set the MY on the agency and the limited amount IX. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices 1982 light truck fuel economy standards of information available, NHTSA’s at a level which it recognized might be analysis of manufacturer capabilities A. Economic Impacts above the maximum feasible fuel has been truncated. Given these The Office of Management and Budget economy capability of Chrysler, based constraints, NHTSA has concluded that reviewed this rule under Executive on the conclusion that the energy it cannot determine which of the Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and benefits associated with the higher manufacturers with a substantial share Review. Although the light truck CAFE standard would outweigh the harm to of sales is the least capable standard for MY 2004 does not differ Chrysler. 45 FR 20871, 20876, March 31, manufacturer for model year 2004. from the fuel economy standards for the 1980. However, as the agency noted in NHTSA concludes that 20.7 mpg is the preceding model years, we are treating deciding not to set the MYs 1983–85 maximum feasible standard for the 2004 this rule as ‘‘economically significant’’ light truck standards above Ford’s level model year. For the reasons discussed under Executive Order 12866 and of capability, Chrysler had only 10–15 below, this level balances the uncertain ‘‘major’’ under the Congressional percent of the light truck domestic sales, petroleum savings associated with a Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 16059
added by the Small Business Regulatory The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 F. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This (Public Law 96–354) requires each The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act rule is also considered significant under agency to evaluate the potential effects of 1995 (Public Law 104–4) requires the Department’s regulatory policies and of a rule on small businesses. agencies to prepare a written assessment procedures. As noted above, the agency Establishment of a fuel economy of the costs, benefits and other effects of has been operating under a restriction standard for light trucks affects motor proposed or final rules that include a on the use of appropriations for the last vehicle manufacturers, few of which are Federal mandate likely to result in the six fiscal years. The restriction has small entities. The Small Business expenditure by State, local or tribal prevented the agency from gathering Administration (SBA) has set size governments, in the aggregate, or by the and analyzing data relating to fuel standards for determining if a business private sector, of more than $100 economy capabilities and the costs and within a specific industrial million annually. For the same reasons benefits of improving the level of fuel classification is a small business. The discussed in the section above on economy. Particularly since that Standard Industrial Classification code economic impacts, the agency has been restriction was lifted only on December used by the SBA for Motor Vehicles and unable to prepare a separate assessment. 18, 2001, the agency has been unable to Passenger Car Bodies (3711) defines a prepare a separate economic analysis for small manufacturer as one having 1,000 G. Paperwork Reduction Act this rulemaking. The agency notes, employees or fewer. There are no information collection however, that the standard it is setting Very few single stage manufacturers requirements in this rule. for the 2004 model year will not make of motor vehicles within the United it necessary for the manufacturers with H. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) States have 1,000 or fewer employees. a substantial share of the market to Those that do are not likely to have The Department of Transportation change their product plans. sufficient resources to design, develop, assigns a regulation identifier number B. Environmental Impacts produce and market a light truck. For (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in this reason, we certify that this final rule the Unified Agenda of Federal We have not conducted an evaluation regarding the corporate average fuel Regulations. The Regulatory Information of the impacts of this final rule under economy of light trucks will not have a Service Center publishes the Unified the National Environmental Policy Act. significant economic impact on a Agenda in April and October of each NHTSA is setting the 2004 model year substantial number of small entities. year. You may use the RIN contained in light truck CAFE standard at the same the heading at the beginning of this level as the standard applicable to the E. Federalism document to find this action in the 1996 through 2003 model years. As this Unified Agenda. rule maintains the fuel economy E.O. 13132 requires NHTSA to standard at the same level as prior years, develop an accountable process to I. Plain Language it does not impose change in any ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by Executive Order 12866 requires each environmental impacts. Accordingly, no State and local officials in the agency to write all rules in plain environmental assessment is required. development of regulatory policies that language. Application of the principles have federalism implications.’’ E.O. of plain language includes consideration C. Energy Impacts 13132 defines the term ‘‘Policies that of the following questions: NHTSA has not changed the level of have federalism implications’’ to —Have we organized the material to suit the light truck CAFE standards in include regulations that have the public’s needs? setting the standard for the 2004 model ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, —Are the requirements in the rule year. This final rule, which maintains on the relationship between the national clearly stated? the CAFE standard at its existing level, government and the States, or on the —Does the rule contain technical does not have ‘‘a significant adverse distribution of power and language or jargon that is not clear? effect on the supply, distribution, or use responsibilities among the various —Would a different format (grouping of energy,’’ as defined by Executive levels of government.’’ Under E.O. and order of sections, use of headings, Order 13211, Actions Concerning 13132, NHTSA may not issue a paragraphing) make the rule easier to Regulations That Significantly Affect regulation that has federalism understand? Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. At implication, that imposes substantial —Would more (but shorter) sections be this point, therefore, this action is not a direct compliance costs, and that is not better? ‘‘significant energy action’’ under required by statute, unless the Federal —Could we improve clarity by adding Executive Order 13211 and no government provides the funds tables, lists, or diagrams? ‘‘Statement of Energy Effects’’ is necessary to pay the direct compliance —What else could we do to make the required. costs incurred by State and local rule easier to understand? governments, or NHTSA consults with D. Impacts on Small Entities If you have any responses to these State and local officials early in the questions, please forward them to Otto Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility process of developing the proposed Matheke, Office of Chief Counsel, Act, the agency has considered the regulation. National Highway Traffic Safety impact this rulemaking will have on This final rule will not have Administration, 400 Seventh Street, small entities. I certify that this action substantial direct effects on the States, SW., Washington, DC 20590. would not have a significant economic on the relationship between the national impact on a substantial number of small government and the States, or on the J. Executive Order 13045 entities. Therefore, a regulatory distribution of power and Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, flexibility analysis is not required for responsibilities among the various April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: this action. Few, if any, light truck levels of government as specified in E.O. (1) Is determined to be economically manufacturers subject to the rule are 13132. Thus, the requirements of significant as defined under E.O. 12866, classified as a ‘‘small business’’ under section 6 of the Executive Order do not and (2) concerns an environmental, the Regulatory Flexibility Act. apply to this rule. health or safety risk that NHTSA has
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16060 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Rules and Regulations
reason to believe may have a include the American Society for 1. The authority citation for part 533 disproportionate effect on children. If Testing and Materials (ASTM), the continues to read as follows: the regulatory action meets both criteria, Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2002; delegation of we must evaluate the environmental and the American National Standards authority at 49 CFR 1.50. health or safety effects of the planned Institute (ANSI). If NHTSA does not use rule on children, and explain why the available and potentially applicable 2. Section 533.5 is amended by planned regulation is preferable to other voluntary consensus standards, we are revising Table IV in paragraph (a) to potentially effective and reasonably required by the Act to provide Congress, read as follows: feasible alternatives considered by us. through OMB, an explanation of the § 533.5 Requirements. This rulemaking does not have a reasons for not using such standards. disproportionate effect on children. The We are not aware of any available and (a) * * * primary effect of this rulemaking is to potentially applicable voluntary conserve energy resources by setting a consensus standards, i.e., ones regarding TABLE IV fuel economy standard for light trucks. the maximum feasible level of corporate K. National Technology Transfer and average fuel economy for MY 2004 light Model Year Standard Advancement Act trucks. Therefore, this rule is not based on any voluntary consensus standards. 1996 ...... 20.7 Section 12(d) of the National 1997 ...... 20.7 Technology Transfer and Advancement L. Department of Energy Review 1998 ...... 20.7 Act (NTTAA) requires NHTSA to 1999 ...... 20.7 In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 2000 ...... 20.7 evaluate and use existing voluntary § 32902(j), we submitted this rule to the consensus standards in its regulatory 2001 ...... 20.7 Department of Energy for review. That 2002 ...... 20.7 activities unless doing so would be Department did not make any comments 2003 ...... 20.7 inconsistent with applicable law (e.g., that we have not responded to. 2004 ...... 20.7 the statutory provisions regarding NHTSA’s vehicle safety authority) or List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 533 * * * * * otherwise impractical. In meeting that Energy conservation, Motor vehicles. requirement, we are required to consult Issued on: March 29, 2002. with voluntary, private sector, PART 533—[AMENDED] Jeffrey W. Runge, consensus standards bodies. Examples Administrator. of organizations generally regarded as In consideration of the foregoing, 49 [FR Doc. 02–8122 Filed 4–1–02; 11:31 am] voluntary consensus standards bodies CFR part 533 is amended as follows: BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
VerDate Mar<13>2002 09:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04APR1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APR1 16061
Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 65
Thursday, April 4, 2002
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER I. Background and Explanation of AAAP will enable them to do so in a contains notices to the public of the proposed Proposal timely manner. issuance of rules and regulations. The The AAAP includes the following purpose of these notices is to give interested The Personnel Security Assurance screening elements: persons an opportunity to participate in the Program (PSAP) is a special access (1) Testing for the use of illegal drugs rule making prior to the adoption of the final authorization program, established by in accordance with the provisions of rules. DOE pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act DOE directives implementing Executive of 1954, to assure the reliability of Order 12564 or, for contractor individuals whose positions: (1) Afford DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY employees, the provisions of 10 CFR direct access to Category I quantities of part 707, ‘‘Workplace Substance Abuse special nuclear material (including 10 CFR Part 710 Programs at DOE Sites’’; guarding and transporting special (2) Completion of a National Agency nuclear material), (2) are identified as Check; for contractor employees, this RIN 1992–AA30 nuclear material production reactor includes checks of Office of Personnel operators, or (3) have the potential for Eligibility for Security Police Officer Management security indices, causing unacceptable damage to Department of Defense clearance Positions in the Personnel Security national security. The PSAP regulations Assurance Program indices, Federal Bureau of Investigation are at 10 CFR part 710, subpart B and name and fingerprint indices, and currently require an employee or AGENCY: Department of Energy. Credit Bureau files, and for Federal applicant for any PSAP position to have employees, the National Agency Check ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking a Q access authorization based upon a also includes written inquiries to past and opportunity for public comment. full background investigation before employers, references given by the being granted a PSAP access individual, and any educational SUMMARY: The Department of Energy authorization. 10 CFR 710.60(c). institutions attended recently; (DOE) proposes to amend its regulations This proposed rule would amend 10 (3) A psychological assessment using to allow newly hired individuals in CFR 710.60 to permit security police a standard psychological screening test security police officer (SPO) positions officers (SPOs) to be eligible for a PSAP to determine if the individual has any who have received an interim Q access access authorization based on an psychological/behavioral condition authorization through DOE’s interim access authorization obtained which might call into question the Accelerated Access Authorization through the Department’s Accelerated individual’s reliability, judgment, and Program (AAAP) to be eligible to hold Access Authorization Program (AAAP). trustworthiness; a Personnel Security Assurance Program A definition of the term ‘‘Accelerated (4) A controlled counterintelligence- (PSAP) position. Currently, DOE’s Access Authorization Program’’ is scope polygraph examination in regulations require a Q access proposed to be added to section 710.54 accordance with 10 CFR part 709; and authorization based upon a full of the PSAP regulations. The proposed (5) Review of the applicant’s background investigation for all PSAP rule would permit newly hired SPOs completed ‘‘Questionnaire for National positions. The events of September 11, who obtain interim access authorization Security Positions’’ (Standard Form 86). 2001, have made use of the AAAP to through the AAAP to assume their With the exception of the AAAP- expedite SPO screening vitally PSAP duties before completion of the specific psychological/behavioral important. Our activities will need to ongoing full background investigation. If evaluation, the AAAP screening increase the size of their protective the proposed rule is adopted, newly elements are required elements for forces, and use of the AAAP will enable hired SPOs who obtain an interim anyone in a PSAP position. Thus, the them to do so in a timely manner. access authorization through the AAAP proposed rule change would enhance and successfully complete the PSAP the ability for SPOs who have DATES: Written comments must be requirements will be able to assume completed their required training and received on or before May 6, 2002. their PSAP duties immediately upon received an interim access authorization ADDRESSES: Comments (3 copies) should completing the 9-week basic SPO to assume PSAP duties prior to be addressed to: Linda Repass, training course. completion of their background Personnel Security Assurance Program The AAAP was implemented to assist investigation. Due to the controlled Manager, Security Policy Staff, Office of DOE managers and DOE contractors nature and continuous oversight of SPO Security, Department of Energy, SO– who request interim access positions, there is no appreciable risk to 112, 1000 Independence Ave., SW., authorization for individuals pursuant allowing assumption of PSAP duties by Washington, DC 20585. to DOE Order 472.1, DOE Order 5631.2C SPOs prior to completion and (Chapters I–IX), and related DOE adjudication of the background FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: directives. Entry into the AAAP is investigation. Linda Repass, Personnel Security voluntary and written consent of the II. Regulatory and Procedural Assurance Program Manager, Security employee or applicant is required. Policy Staff, Office of Security, Requirements The events of September 11, 2001, Department of Energy, SO–112, 1000 have made use of the AAAP to expedite A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, SPO screening vitally important. Our Today’s regulatory action has been DC 20585, 301–903–4800. activities will need to increase the size determined not to be a significant SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: of their protective forces, and use of the regulatory action under Executive Order
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 16062 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules
12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and contractors are not small businesses. various levels of government. No further Review’’ (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Accordingly, DOE certifies that the action is required by the Executive Accordingly, this action was not subject proposed rule, if promulgated, would Order. to review under that Executive Order by not have a significant economic impact G. Review Under the Unfunded the Office of Information and Regulatory on a substantial number of small Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Affairs of the Office of Management and entities. DOE has not prepared a Budget (OMB). regulatory flexibility analysis for this Title II of the Unfunded Mandates rulemaking. Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) B. Review Under Executive Order 12988 requires each federal agency to prepare With respect to the review of existing D. Review Under the Paperwork a written assessment of the effects of regulations and the promulgation of Reduction Act any federal mandate in a proposed or new regulations, section 3(a) of No new collection of information final rule that may result in the Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice would be imposed by this proposed expenditure by state, local, and tribal Reform’’ (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996) rule. Accordingly, no clearance by the governments, in the aggregate, or by the imposes on Executive agencies the Office of Management and Budget is private sector, of $100 million in any general duty to adhere to the following required under the Paperwork one year. The Act also requires a federal requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). agency to develop an effective process errors and ambiguity; (2) write to permit timely input by elected E. Review Under the National regulations to minimize litigation; and officers of state, local, and tribal Environmental Policy Act (3) provide a clear legal standard for governments on a proposed ‘‘significant affected conduct rather than a general DOE has concluded that promulgation intergovernmental mandate,’’ and it standard and promote simplification of this proposed rule falls into a class of requires an agency to develop a plan for and burden reduction. With regard to actions that would not individually or giving notice and opportunity for timely the review required by section 3(a) and cumulatively have a significant impact input to potentially affected small section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988 on the human environment, as governments before establishing any specifically requires that Executive determined by DOE’s regulations requirement that might significantly or agencies make every reasonable effort to implementing the National uniquely affect them. This proposed ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 rule does not contain any federal specifies the preemptive effect, if any; U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Specifically, this mandate, so these requirements do not (2) clearly specifies any effect on proposed rule would amend DOE’s apply. existing federal law or regulation; (3) regulations governing access to PSAP provides a clear legal standard for and would not change the H. Review Under the Treasury and affected conduct while promoting environmental effect of the PSAP General Government Appropriations simplification and burden reduction; (4) regulations. Therefore, this rulemaking Act, 1999 specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) is covered under the Categorical Section 654 of the Treasury and adequately defines key terms; and (6) Exclusion in paragraph A5 to subpart D, General Government Appropriations addresses other important issues 10 CFR part 1021. Accordingly, neither Act of 1999, Public Law 105–277, affecting clarity and general an environmental assessment nor an requires Federal agencies to issue a draftsmanship under any guidelines environmental impact statement is Family Policymaking Assessment for issued by the Attorney General. Section required. any proposed rule that may affect family well-being. Today’s proposal would not 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires F. Review Under Executive Order 13132 Executive agencies to review regulations have any impact on the autonomy or in light of applicable standards in Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ integrity of the family as an institution. section 3(a) and section 3(b) to (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it determine whether they are met or it is agencies to develop an accountable is not necessary to prepare a Family unreasonable to meet one or more of process to ensure meaningful and timely Policymaking Assessment. them. DOE has completed the required input by State and local officials in the I. Review Under Executive Order 13211 review and determined that, to the development of regulatory policies that extent permitted by law, this proposed have ‘‘federalism implications.’’ Policies Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions rule meets the relevant standards of that have federalism implications are Concerning Regulations That Executive Order 12988. defined in the Executive Order to Significantly Affect Energy Supply, include regulations that have Distribution, or Use,’’ (66 FR 28355, C. Review Under the Regulatory ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, May 22, 2001) requires Federal agencies Flexibility Act on the relationship between the national to prepare and submit to the Office of The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 government and the States, or on the Information and Regulatory Affairs U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation distribution of power and (OIRA), Office of Management and of an initial regulatory flexibility responsibilities among the various Budget, a Statement of Energy Effects for analysis for any rule that by law must levels of government.’’ On March 14, any proposed significant energy action. be proposed for public comment, unless 2000, DOE published a statement of A ‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined the agency certifies that the rule, if policy describing the intergovernmental as any action by an agency that promulgated, will not have a significant consultation process it will follow in the promulgates or is expected to lead to the economic impact on a substantial development of such regulations (65 FR promulgation of a final rule, and that: number of small entities. This proposed 13735). DOE has examined today’s (1) Is a significant regulatory action rule would not directly regulate small proposed rule and determined that it under Executive Order 12866, or any businesses or other small entities. It would not have a substantial direct successor order; and (2) is likely to have would apply only to individuals who effect on the States, on the relationship a significant adverse effect on the apply for SPO positions at sites owned between the national government and supply, distribution, or use of energy; or or operated by DOE or DOE contractors. the States, or on the distribution of (3) is designated by the Administrator of DOE management and operating power and responsibilities among the OIRA as a significant energy action. For
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules 16063
any proposed significant energy action, Issued in Washington, on March 22, 2002. information provided by management the agency must give a detailed Spencer Abraham, and medical sources. statement of any adverse effects on Secretary. * * * * * energy supply, distribution, or use For the reasons set forth in the [FR Doc. 02–8134 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] should the proposal be implemented, preamble, Part 710 of Chapter III of Title BILLING CODE 6450–01–P and of reasonable alternatives to the 10, Code of Federal Regulations is action and their expected benefits on proposed to be amended, as set forth energy supply, distribution, or use. below: SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Today’s proposed rule is not a significant energy action. Accordingly, PART 710—CRITERIA AND 13 CFR Part 121 DOE has not prepared a Statement of PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINING Small Business Size Standards; Energy Effects. ELIGIBILITY FOR ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED MATTER OR SPECIAL Waiver of the Nonmanufacturer Rule; III. Opportunity for Public Comment NUCLEAR MATERIAL Rule for Bearings, Plain, Unmounted and Bearings, Mounted; Notice of Interested persons are invited to 1. The authority citation for part 710 Intent participate by submitting data, views or is revised to read as follows: arguments with respect to the rule AGENCY: Small Business Administration. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2165; 2201; 5815; amendment proposed in this notice. 7101 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.; E.O. ACTION: Notice of intent to waive. Three copies of written comments 10450, 3 CFR 1949–1953 Comp., p. 936, as SUMMARY: The Small Business should be submitted to the address amended; E.O. 10865, 3 CFR 1959–1963 Administration (SBA) is considering a indicated in the ADDRESSES section of Comp., p. 398, as amended, 3 CFR Chap. IV. this notice. All comments received will waiver of the Nonmanufacturer Rule for 2. Section 710.54 of subpart B is bearings, plain, unmounted and be available for public inspection as part amended by adding, in alphabetical bearings, mounted. The basis for of the administrative record on file for order, the definition of ‘‘Accelerated waivers is that no small business this rulemaking in the Department of Access Authorization Program’’ to read manufacturers are supplying these Energy Reading Room, Room 1E–190, as follows: classes of products to the Federal Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence § 710.54 Definitions. Government. The effect of a waiver Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585, would be to allow otherwise qualified (202) 586–3142, between the hours 9 * * * * * regular dealers to supply the products of a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Accelerated Access Authorization any domestic manufacturer on a Federal Friday, except Federal holidays. All Program means the DOE program for contract set aside for small businesses or written comments received by the date granting interim access to classified awarded through the SBA 8(a) Program. indicated in the DATES section of this matter and special nuclear material The purpose of this notice of intent is notice and all other relevant information based on a drug test, a National Agency to solicit comments and source in the record will be carefully assessed Check, a psychological assessment, a information from interested parties. and fully considered prior to the counterintelligence-scope polygraph DATES: Comments and sources must be examination in accordance with 10 CFR publication of a final rule. Any submitted on or before April 15, 2002. information of data that the submitter part 709, and a review of the applicant’s ADDRESSES: considers to be exempt from public completed ‘‘Questionnaire for National Edith Butler, Program Analyst, U.S. Small Business disclosure by law must be so identified Security Positions.’’ (Standard Form 86). Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., and submitted in writing (one copy), as * * * * * Washington DC, 20416, Tel: (202) 619– well as one complete copy from which 3. Section 710.60 of subpart B is 0422. the information believed to be exempt amended by revising paragraph (c) to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: from disclosure is deleted. DOE will read as follows: determine if the information or data is Edith Butler, Program Analyst, (202) exempt from disclosure. § 710.60 DOE security review and 619–0422 FAX (202) 205–7280. clearance determination. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public DOE has not scheduled a public * * * * * Law 100–656, enacted on November 15, hearing to receive oral presentations of (c) Review for initial PSAP access 1988, incorporated into the Small views, data and arguments because DOE authorization. An initial PSAP access Business Act the previously existing does not believe the proposed rule authorization requires the applicant or regulation that recipients of Federal presents a substantial issue of fact or employee to have a DOE Q access contracts set aside for small businesses law or that the proposed rule would authorization based upon a background or SBA 8(a) Program procurement must likely have a substantial impact on the investigation, except for Security Police provide the product of a small business Nation’s economy or large numbers of Officers who may be granted PSAP manufacturer or processor, if the individuals or businesses. DOE will access authorization based on an recipient is other than the actual reconsider this matter if public interim Q access authorization obtained manufacturer or processor. This comments show that such issues or through the Accelerated Access requirement is commonly referred to as potential impacts exist. Authorization Program. The the Nonmanufacturer Rule. The SBA List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 710 adjudication and determination for a regulations imposing this requirement PSAP access authorization shall be are found at 13 CFR 121.906(b) and Administrative practice and based upon a review of security 121.1106(b). Section 303(h) of the law procedure, Classified information, information, including the results of the provides for waiver of this requirement Government contracts, Government background investigation (or by SBA for any ‘‘class of products’’ for employees, Nuclear materials, Accelerated Access Authorization which there are no small business Revocation, Security measures, Program screening elements in the case manufacturers or processors in the Suspension. of Security Police Officers) and the Federal market.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 16064 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules
To be considered available to series airplanes, that currently requires Comments Invited participate in the Federal market on repetitive inspections to detect Interested persons are invited to these classes of products, a small discrepancies of the quick-disconnect participate in the making of the business manufacturer must have coupling on the fuel hose located at the proposed rule by submitting such submitted a proposal for a contract fan case firewall; corrective action, if written data, views, or arguments as solicitation or received a contract from necessary; and installation of a clamp they may desire. Communications shall the Federal government within the last shell on the coupling to prevent identify the Rules Docket number and 24 months. The SBA defines ‘‘class of separation of the coupling halves. This be submitted in triplicate to the address products’’ based on two coding systems. action would limit the applicability of specified above. All communications The first is the Office of Management the existing requirements, clarify certain received on or before the closing date and Budget North American Industry existing requirements, and require for comments, specified above, will be Classification System (NAICS). The removal of the clamp shell installed considered before taking action on the second is the Product and Service Code previously and replacement of the proposed rule. The proposals contained established by the Federal Procurement existing quick-disconnect fuel supply in this action may be changed in light Data System. hose, coupling, and strut fitting with of the comments received. This notice of intent proposes to new, fixed-B-nut-type parts. Such Submit comments using the following waive the Nonmanufacturer Rule for replacement would end the requirement format: bearings, plain, unmounted and for repetitive inspections. This action is • Organize comments issue-by-issue. bearings unmounted, North American necessary to prevent major fuel leakage For example, discuss a request to Industry Classification System due to excessive wear of the quick- change the compliance time and a (NAICS)333613, public is invited to disconnect coupling on the fuel hose, request to change the service bulletin comment or provide source information fire in the engine nacelle, and reference as two separate issues. to SBA on the proposed waiver of the consequent loss of thrust from the • For each issue, state what specific nonmanufacturer rule for bearings, affected engine, which could result in change to the proposed AD is being plain, unmounted and bearings, reduced controllability of the airplane. requested. mounted, and invites the public to This action is intended to address the • Include justification (e.g., reasons or comment or provide information on identified unsafe condition. data) for each request. potential small business manufacturers DATES: Comments must be received by Comments are specifically invited on for these products. May 20, 2002. the overall regulatory, economic, In an effort to identify potential small ADDRESSES: environmental, and energy aspects of business manufacturers, the SBA has Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation the proposed rule. All comments searched Procurement Marketing & submitted will be available, both before Access Network (PRO-Net) and the SBA Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, and after the closing date for comments, will publish a notice in the FedBizOpps. in the Rules Docket for examination by The public is invited to comment or Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–NM– 367–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., interested persons. A report provide source information to SBA on summarizing each FAA-public contact the proposed waiver of the Renton, Washington 98055–4056. Comments may be inspected at this concerned with the substance of this Nonmanufacturer Rule for these classes proposal will be filed in the Rules of products. location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Docket. Luz A. Hopewell, holidays. Comments may be submitted Commenters wishing the FAA to Associate Administrator for Government via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments acknowledge receipt of their comments Contracting. may also be sent via the Internet using submitted in response to this action [FR Doc. 02–7958 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] the following address: 9-anm- must submit a self-addressed, stamped BILLING CODE 8025–01–P [email protected]. Comments sent postcard on which the following via fax or the Internet must contain statement is made: ‘‘Comments to ‘‘Docket No. 2000–NM–367–AD’’ in the Docket Number 2000–NM–367–AD.’’ The postcard will be date-stamped and DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION subject line and need not be submitted in triplicate. Comments sent via the returned to the commenter. Federal Aviation Administration Internet as attached electronic files must Availability of NPRMs be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for 14 CFR Part 39 Windows or ASCII text. Any person may obtain a copy of this The service information referenced in NPRM by submitting a request to the [Docket No. 2000–NM–367–AD] the proposed rule may be obtained from FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No. RIN 2120–AA64 Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 2000–NM–367–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 98124–2207. This information may be SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. Model 737–600, –700, and –800 Series examined at the FAA, Transport Discussion Airplanes Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. On January 28, 1999, the FAA issued AGENCY: Federal Aviation AD 99–03–08, amendment 39–11022 (64 Administration, DOT. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FR 5590, February 4, 1999), applicable Douglas Pegors, Aerospace Engineer, ACTION: to certain Boeing Model 737–600, –700, Notice of proposed rulemaking Propulsion Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, (NPRM). –700IGW, and –800 series airplanes, to Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, require repetitive inspections to detect SUMMARY: This document proposes the 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, discrepancies of the quick-disconnect supersedure of an existing airworthiness Washington 98055–4056; telephone coupling on the fuel hose located at the directive (AD), applicable to certain (425) 227–1446; fax (425) 227–1181. fan case firewall; corrective action, if Boeing Model 737–600, –700, and –800 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: necessary; and installation of a clamp
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules 16065
shell on the coupling to prevent the need for repetitive inspections for paragraph (b) of AD 99–03–08 are separation of the coupling halves. That discrepancies of the quick-disconnect necessary for Group II airplanes. action was prompted by a report that a coupling on the fuel hose. Therefore, to ease the administrative quick-disconnect coupling on the fuel Accomplishment of the actions burden of this proposed AD for hose on an in-service airplane was specified in Revision 2 of the alert operators of the Group II airplanes, the found loose and leaking fuel. The service bulletin is intended to FAA has revised paragraphs (a) and (b) requirements of that AD are intended to adequately address the identified unsafe of this proposed AD to apply only to detect and correct excessive wear of the condition. Group 1 airplanes, as listed in Revision quick-disconnect coupling on the fuel The effectivity listing of Revision 2 of 2 of the alert service bulletin. Further, hose, which could result in major fuel the alert service bulletin has also been for clarification, the repetitive revised to list only airplanes up to and leakage, fire in the engine nacelle, and inspections required by paragraph (b) of including line number 560. Airplanes consequent loss of thrust from the AD 99–03–08 have been moved to affected engine. with line number 561 and subsequent have had the new fuel supply hose, paragraph (c) of this proposed AD, and Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule coupling, and strut fitting installed the corrective actions in paragraphs In the preamble to AD 99–03–08, the during production. (b)(1) and (b)(2) of AD 99–03–08 have FAA specified that the actions required been redesignated as paragraphs (c)(1) by that AD were considered ‘‘interim Explanation of Change in Applicability and (c)(2) of this proposed AD. Also, a action’’ and that the manufacturer was AD 99–03–08 applies to Boeing Model new Note 5 has been included in this developing a modification to positively 737–600, –700, –700IGW, and –800 proposed AD to clarify that the address the unsafe condition. The FAA series airplanes. This proposed AD inspections in paragraph (c) of this AD indicated that it may consider further would apply to certain Boeing Model are the same as those required by rulemaking action once the modification 737–600, –700, and –800 series paragraph (b) of AD 99–03–08. was developed, approved, and available. airplanes, as listed in Revision 2 of the Paragraph (b)(2) of AD 99–03–08 alert service bulletin, described The manufacturer now has developed identifies Table 1. of the alert service previously. We have determined that no such a modification, and the FAA has bulletin as the appropriate source of determined that further rulemaking model designated ‘‘737–700IGW’’ is service information for corrective action is indeed necessary; this listed on the type certificate for Model actions if any discrepancy is found proposed AD follows from that 737 series airplanes, and the reference determination. to such a model in the existing AD was during the repetitive inspections. The inadvertent. For the purposes of this FAA has determined that Figures 1 and Explanation of Relevant Service AD, we consider such airplanes, which 3 of the alert service bulletin are more Information are in an increased-gross-weight comprehensive sources of service AD 99–03–08 refers to the original configuration, to be Model 737–700 information for corrective actions if any issue of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin series airplanes; thus it is not necessary discrepancy is found during the 737–73A1011, dated November 25, to refer to them separately. Note 1 of repetitive inspections following 1998, as the appropriate source of this proposed AD clarifies that these installation of the clamp shell kit. service information for required actions. airplanes would be subject to this Therefore, for clarification, we have Subsequent to the issuance of AD 99– proposed AD. revised paragraph (c)(2) of this proposed 03–08, the FAA reviewed and approved AD (which, as discussed previously, Explanation of Other Changes to the Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– was designated paragraph (b)(2) in AD Requirements of the Existing AD 73A1011, Revision 1, dated April 15, 99–03–08) to refer to Figures 1 and 3 of 1999. That alert service bulletin divides The FAA has clarified the inspection the alert service bulletin, as applicable, the list of affected airplanes into Group requirement contained in paragraph (a) as the appropriate sources of service I (those airplanes on which the clamp of AD 99–03–08. Whereas that AD information for necessary corrective shell was not installed on the quick specifies a visual inspection, the FAA action. disconnect coupling during production) has revised paragraph (a) of this and Group II (those airplanes on which proposed AD to clarify that its intent is Explanation of Requirements of the clamp shell was installed on the to require a general visual inspection. Proposed Rule quick disconnect coupling during Note 3 of this proposed AD defines that production). inspection. Since an unsafe condition has been The FAA now has reviewed and Paragraph (b) of AD 99–03–08 identified that is likely to exist or approved Boeing Alert Service Bulletin requires installation of a certain clamp develop on other products of this same 737–73A1011, Revision 2, dated July 13, shell on the quick-disconnect coupling type design, the proposed AD would 2000. In addition to procedures similar on the fuel hose, and repetitive supersede AD 99–03–08 to continue to to those contained in the original issue inspections to detect discrepancies of require repetitive inspections to detect (and Revision 1) of the alert service the quick-disconnect coupling. Because discrepancies of the quick-disconnect bulletin, Revision 2 of the alert service AD 99–03–08 applies to all Boeing coupling on the fuel hose located at the bulletin describes procedures for Model 737–600, –700, and –800 series fan case firewall; corrective action, if replacement of the existing quick- airplanes, all of these airplanes are necessary; and installation of a clamp disconnect fuel supply hose, coupling, currently subject to the requirements of shell on the coupling to prevent and strut fitting with new, fixed-B-nut- paragraph (b) of that AD. However, separation of the coupling halves. The type parts. The procedures include certain Model 737–600, –700, and –800 proposed AD would limit the removing the clamp shell installed on series airplanes were delivered with the applicability of the existing the quick-disconnect coupling on the clamp shell already installed. (As stated requirements, clarify certain existing fuel hose per the requirements of the previously, these airplanes are requirements, and require existing AD (for Group I airplanes) or identified as Group II in Revision 2 of accomplishment of the actions in during production (for Group II the alert service bulletin.) Thus, only Revision 2 of the alert service bulletin, airplanes). This replacement eliminates the repetitive inspections required by described previously.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 16066 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules
Cost Impact is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ been eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to address it. There are approximately 560 under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT Compliance: Required as indicated, unless airplanes of the affected design in the accomplished previously. worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if To prevent major fuel leakage due to 271 airplanes of U.S. registry would be excessive wear of the quick-disconnect affected by this proposed AD. promulgated, will not have a significant coupling on the fuel hose, fire in the engine The inspection that is currently economic impact, positive or negative, nacelle, and consequent loss of thrust from required by AD 99–03–08 takes on a substantial number of small entities the affected engine, which could result in approximately 1 work hour per airplane under the criteria of the Regulatory reduced controllability of the airplane, to accomplish, at an average labor rate Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft accomplish the following: of $60 per work hour. Based on these regulatory evaluation prepared for this Restatement of Requirements of AD 99–03– figures, the cost impact of the currently action is contained in the Rules Docket. 08 required inspection on U.S. operators is A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules Docket at the Repetitive Inspections and Corrective Actions estimated to be $16,260, or $60 per (a) For airplanes listed in Group I of Boeing airplane, per inspection cycle. location provided under the caption ADDRESSES. Alert Service Bulletin 737–73A1011, For airplanes on which it has not Revision 2, dated July 13, 2000: Within 7 already been accomplished during List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 days after February 19, 1999 (the effective production, the installation of a clamp date of AD 99–03–08, amendment 39–11022), shell required by AD 99–03–08 takes Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation perform a general visual inspection to detect approximately 2 work hours per safety, Safety. discrepancies (i.e., fuel leakage, wear of the airplane to accomplish, at an average lock teeth, or missing lock pins on the The Proposed Amendment coupling nut) of the quick-disconnect labor rate of $60 per work hour. Accordingly, pursuant to the coupling on the fuel hose located at the fan Required parts are provided by the case firewall, in accordance with Boeing manufacturer at no cost to the operators. authority delegated to me by the Alert Service Bulletin 737–73A1011, dated Based on these figures, the cost impact Administrator, the Federal Aviation November 25, 1998; or Revision 2, dated July of the currently required installation is Administration proposes to amend part 13, 2000. estimated to be $120 per airplane. 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (1) If no discrepancy is detected, repeat the The new replacement that is proposed (14 CFR part 39) as follows: inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 flight hours, until the installation in this AD action would take PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS required by paragraph (b) of this AD is approximately 4 work hours per DIRECTIVES accomplished. airplane to accomplish, at an average (2) If any discrepancy is detected, prior to labor rate of $60 per work hour. 1. The authority citation for part 39 further flight, perform follow-on corrective Required parts would be provided by continues to read as follows: actions, as applicable, in accordance with the manufacturer at no cost to the TABLE 1. of the Accomplishment operators. Based on these figures, the Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Instructions of the alert service bulletin, and repeat the inspection thereafter at the time cost impact of the proposed replacement § 39.13 [Amended] specified in TABLE 1. of the on U.S. operators is estimated to be 2. Section 39.13 is amended by Accomplishment Instructions of the alert $65,040, or $240 per airplane. removing amendment 39–11022 (64 FR service bulletin. The cost impact figures discussed 5590, February 4, 1999), and by adding above are based on assumptions that no Installation of Clamp Shell and Repetitive a new airworthiness directive (AD), to Inspections operator has yet accomplished any of read as follows: the proposed requirements of this AD (b) For airplanes listed in Group I of Boeing Boeing: Docket 2000–NM–367–AD. Alert Service Bulletin 737–73A1011, action, and that no operator would Revision 2, dated July 13, 2000: Within 30 accomplish those actions in the future if Supersedes AD 99–03–08, Amendment 39– 11022. days after February 19, 1999, install an this proposed AD were not adopted. The Aeroquip Clamp Shell, having part number cost impact figures discussed in AD Applicability: Model 737–600, –700, and (P/N) AE20074–165, on the quick-disconnect rulemaking actions represent only the –800 series airplanes, listed in Group 1 or 2 coupling on the fuel hose, which is located of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– time necessary to perform the specific at the fan case firewall, in accordance with 73A1011, Revision 2, dated July 13, 2000; Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–73A1011, actions actually required by the AD. certificated in any category. These figures typically do not include dated November 25, 1998; or Revision 2, Note 1: This AD applies to Model 737–700 dated July 13, 2000. Accomplishment of such incidental costs, such as the time series airplanes in an increased-gross-weight installation terminates the repetitive required to gain access and close up, configuration, as listed in the service bulletin inspection requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) planning time, or time necessitated by referred to in the applicability statement of and (a)(2) of this AD. other administrative actions. this AD. New Requirements of This AD Regulatory Impact Note 2: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the preceding applicability Note 3: For the purposes of this AD, a The regulations proposed herein provision, regardless of whether it has been general visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘A would not have a substantial direct modified, altered, or repaired in the area visual examination of an interior or exterior effect on the States, on the relationship subject to the requirements of this AD. For area, installation, or assembly to detect between the national Government and airplanes that have been modified, altered, or obvious damage, failure, or irregularity. This level of inspection is made under normally the States, or on the distribution of repaired so that the performance of the requirements of this AD is affected, the available lighting conditions such as power and responsibilities among the daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or drop- various levels of government. Therefore, owner/operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance in light, and may require removal or opening of it is determined that this proposal accordance with paragraph (f)(1) of this AD. access panels or doors. Stands, ladders, or would not have federalism implications The request should include an assessment of platforms may be required to gain proximity under Executive Order 13132. the effect of the modification, alteration, or to the area being checked.’’ For the reasons discussed above, I repair on the unsafe condition addressed by Note 4: Accomplishment of the certify that this proposed regulation (1) this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not requirements of paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules 16067
this AD according to Boeing Alert Service compliance with this AD, if any, may be may also be sent via the Internet using Bulletin 737–73A1011, Revision 1, dated obtained from the Seattle ACO. the following address: 9-anm- April 15, 1999, is acceptable for compliance Special Flight Permits [email protected]. Comments sent with those paragraphs. via fax or the Internet must contain (g) Special flight permits may be issued in Repetitive Inspections accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the ‘‘Docket No. 2001–NM–346–AD’’ in the (c) For airplanes listed in Groups I and II Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 subject line and need not be submitted of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a in triplicate. Comments sent via the 73A1011, Revision 2, dated July 13, 2000: location where the requirements of this AD Internet as attached electronic files must Within 1,000 flight hours after installation of can be accomplished. be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for the clamp shell either per paragraph (b) of Issued in Renton, Washington, on March Windows or ASCII text. this AD (for Group I airplanes) or during 28, 2002. The service information referenced in production (for Group II airplanes), perform Kalene C. Yanamura, the proposed rule may be obtained from the inspection specified in paragraph (a) of Bombardier, Inc., Canadair, Aerospace this AD. Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. Group, P.O. Box 6087, Station Centre- Note 5: The repetitive inspections required ville, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3G9, by paragraph (c) of this AD were previously [FR Doc. 02–8111 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Canada. This information may be required by paragraph (b) of AD 99–03–08. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P examined at the FAA, Transport (1) If no discrepancy is detected, repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind exceed 1,000 flight hours. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at (2) If any discrepancy is detected, prior to the FAA, New York Aircraft further flight, perform follow-on corrective Federal Aviation Administration Certification Office, 10 Fifth Street, actions, as applicable, in accordance with Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York. Figures 1 and 3 of the Accomplishment 14 CFR Part 39 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Instructions of the alert service bulletin, as applicable, and repeat the inspection [Docket No. 2001–NM–346–AD] Luciano Castracane, Aerospace thereafter at the time specified in TABLE 1. Engineer, Systems and Flight Test RIN 2120–AA64 of the Accomplishment Instructions of the Branch, ANE–172, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 10 Fifth alert service bulletin. Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Street, Third Floor, Valley Stream, New Replacement of Existing Parts Model CL–600–2B19 Series Airplanes York 11581; telephone (516) 256–7535; (d) For airplanes listed in Groups I and II AGENCY: Federal Aviation fax (516) 568–2716. of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– 73A1011, Revision 2, dated July 13, 2000: Administration, DOT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking Within 3 years after the effective date of this Comments Invited AD, remove the clamp shell installed per (NPRM). paragraph (b) of this AD (for Group I Interested persons are invited to airplanes) or during production (for Group II SUMMARY: This document proposes the participate in the making of the airplanes), and replace the existing quick- adoption of a new airworthiness proposed rule by submitting such disconnect fuel hose, coupling, and strut directive (AD) that is applicable to written data, views, or arguments as fitting with new, fixed-B-nut-type parts, in certain Bombardier Model CL–600– they may desire. Communications shall accordance with Boeing Alert Service 2B19 series airplanes. This proposal identify the Rules Docket number and Bulletin 737–73A1011, Revision 2, dated July would require inspection of certain 13, 2000. Such replacement terminates the be submitted in triplicate to the address repetitive inspections required by paragraphs installed electrical relays to determine specified above. All communications (a)(1), (a)(2), and (c) of this AD, as applicable. whether they have certain received on or before the closing date manufacturing date codes, and Spares for comments, specified above, will be replacement of the electrical relays with considered before taking action on the (e) After the effective date of this AD, no those date codes with new relays with proposed rule. The proposals contained one may install a quick-disconnect fuel different manufacturing date codes. This supply hose, coupling, or strut fitting with a in this action may be changed in light action is necessary to prevent the failure of the comments received. part number listed in the ‘‘Existing Part of an electrical relay due to a defective Number’’ column of the table under Submit comments using the following paragraph 2.E. of Boeing Alert Service moving blade assembly, which could format: Bulletin 737–73A1011, Revision 2, dated July result in the inability to generate • Organize comments issue-by-issue. 13, 2000, on any airplane. electrical power from the emergency For example, discuss a request to system, if needed. This action is Alternative Methods of Compliance change the compliance time and a intended to address the identified (f)(1) An alternative method of compliance request to change the service bulletin unsafe condition. reference as two separate issues. or adjustment of the compliance time that • provides an acceptable level of safety may be DATES: Comments must be received by For each issue, state what specific used if approved by the Manager, Seattle May 6, 2002. change to the proposed AD is being Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. ADDRESSES: Submit comments in requested. Operators shall submit their requests through triplicate to the Federal Aviation • Include justification (e.g., reasons or an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Administration (FAA), Transport data) for each request. Inspector, who may add comments and then Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, Comments are specifically invited on send it to the Manager, Seattle ACO. Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NM– the overall regulatory, economic, (2) Alternative methods of compliance, approved previously in accordance with AD 346–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., environmental, and energy aspects of 99–03–08, amendment 39–11022, are Renton, Washington 98055–4056. the proposed rule. All comments approved as alternative methods of Comments may be inspected at this submitted will be available, both before compliance with paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., and after the closing date for comments, of this AD. Monday through Friday, except Federal in the Rules Docket for examination by Note 6: Information concerning the holidays. Comments may be submitted interested persons. A report existence of approved alternative methods of via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments summarizing each FAA-public contact
VerDate 11
concerned with the substance of this number but different manufacturing at an average labor rate of $60 per work proposal will be filed in the Rules date codes. hour. Based on these figures, the cost Docket. The affected relays—called ‘‘suspect impact of the proposed inspection on Commenters wishing the FAA to relays’’ in the service bulletin—are the U.S. operators is estimated to be $9,600, acknowledge receipt of their comments following: or $60 per airplane. submitted in response to this action • The air-driven generator (ADG) It would take approximately 2 work must submit a self-addressed, stamped emergency hydraulic power transfer hours per airplane to accomplish the postcard on which the following relay (K1XC), proposed replacement of suspect relay statement is made: ‘‘Comments to • The ADG emergency electrical K1XC at an average labor rate of $60 per Docket Number 2001–NM–346–AD.’’ power transfer relay (K2XD), and work hour. There would be no charge The postcard will be date stamped and • The alternating current (AC) for the replacement part. Based on these returned to the commenter. essential power transfer relay (K3XD). figures, the cost impact of the proposed TCCA classified this service bulletin replacement of suspect relay K1XC on Availability of NPRMs as mandatory and issued Canadian U.S. operators is estimated to be a Any person may obtain a copy of this airworthiness directive CF–2001–27, maximum of $19,200, or $120 per NPRM by submitting a request to the dated July 24, 2001, in order to assure airplane. FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, the continued airworthiness of these It would take approximately 2 work ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No. airplanes in Canada. hours per airplane to accomplish the 2001–NM–346–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, proposed replacement of suspect relays SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. FAA’s Conclusions K2XD and K3XD at an average labor rate This airplane model is manufactured Discussion of $60 per work hour. There would be in Canada and is type certificated for no charge for the replacement parts. Transport Canada Civil Aviation operation in the United States under the Based on these figures, the cost impact (TCCA), which is the airworthiness provisions of § 21.29 of the Federal of the proposed replacement of suspect authority for Canada, notified the FAA Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) relays D or K3XD on U.S. operators is that an unsafe condition may exist on and the applicable bilateral estimated to be a maximum of $19,200, certain Bombardier Model CL–600– airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to or $120 per airplane. 2B19 series airplanes. TCCA advises this bilateral airworthiness agreement, The cost impact figure discussed that certain Leach ‘‘H’’ series electrical TCCA has kept the FAA informed of the above is based on assumptions that no relays having part number (P/N) H– situation described above. The FAA has operator has yet accomplished any of A4A–039 may have defective moving examined the findings of TCCA, the proposed requirements of this AD blade assemblies due to improper heat reviewed all available information, and action, and that no operator would treatment. These defective Leach ‘‘H’’ determined that AD action is necessary accomplish those actions in the future if series relays were manufactured for products of this type design that are this proposed AD were not adopted. The between March 12, 2000, and December certificated for operation in the United cost impact figures discussed in AD 10, 2000, and have manufacturing date States. rulemaking actions represent only the codes from 0011 to 0050. These relays time necessary to perform the specific were not installed in airplanes having Explanation of Requirements of actions actually required by the AD. line numbers 7003–7067 inclusive and Proposed Rule These figures typically do not include 7069–7373 inclusive at the time of Since an unsafe condition has been incidental costs, such as the time delivery. However, if any of the identified that is likely to exist or required to gain access and close up, airplanes with those line numbers have develop on other airplanes of the same planning time, or time necessitated by had an original relay replaced after type design registered in the United other administrative actions. March 1, 2000, it is possible that the States, the proposed AD would require Regulatory Impact replacement relay was defective. accomplishment of the actions specified According to Leach International, relays in the service bulletin described The regulations proposed herein with the defective moving blade previously, except as discussed below. would not have a substantial direct assemblies failed within the first 500 effect on the States, on the relationship flight cycles. This action is necessary to Differences between the Service between the national Government and prevent the failure of an electrical relay Bulletin and this AD the States, or on the distribution of due to a defective moving blade The service bulletin recommends that power and responsibilities among the assembly, which could result in the the visual inspection for suspect relays various levels of government. Therefore, inability to generate electrical power be conducted in conjunction with it is determined that this proposal from the emergency system, if needed. replacement of any suspect relays. would not have federalism implications However, this AD would require an under Executive Order 13132. Explanation of Relevant Service inspection for suspect relays within 14 For the reasons discussed above, I Information days after the effective date of the AD. certify that this proposed regulation (1) Bombardier has issued Alert Service The replacement of any suspect relays is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ Bulletin A601R–24–105, Revision ‘‘A’’, detected would not be required until the under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not dated July 20, 2001, which describes passage of 500 or 1,000 flight hours after a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT procedures for inspection of Leach ‘‘H’’ the effective date of the AD, depending Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 series relays having part number (P/N) upon the relay. FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if H–A4A–039 to determine the promulgated, will not have a significant manufacturing date code. The service Cost Impact economic impact, positive or negative, bulletin also describes procedures for The FAA estimates that 160 airplanes on a substantial number of small entities replacement of those Leach ‘‘H’’ series of U.S. registry would be affected by this under the criteria of the Regulatory relays having manufacturing date codes proposed AD. It would take Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft 0011 through 0050 with new Leach ‘‘H’’ approximately 1 work hour per airplane regulatory evaluation prepared for this series relays having the same part to accomplish the proposed inspection action is contained in the Rules Docket.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules 16069
A copy of it may be obtained by Note 2: Inspections accomplished prior to location where the requirements of this AD contacting the Rules Docket at the the effective date of this AD in accordance can be accomplished. location provided under the caption with Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin Note 6: The subject of this AD is addressed A601R–24–105, dated July 4, 2001, are ADDRESSES. in Canadian airworthiness directive CF– considered acceptable for compliance with 2001–27, dated July 24, 2001. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 the applicable action specified in this amendment. Issued in Renton, Washington, on March Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation (b) As of the effective date of this AD: For 29, 2002. safety, Safety. airplanes determined to have suspect Leach Kalene C. Yanamura, The Proposed Amendment ‘‘H’’ series relays K1XC or K2XD installed, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane dispatch with an inoperative integrated-drive Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. Accordingly, pursuant to the generator (IDG) or auxiliary power unit [FR Doc. 02–8174 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] (APU) is prohibited until replacement of the authority delegated to me by the BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Administrator, the Federal Aviation relay with a new relay is accomplished in Administration proposes to amend part accordance with paragraphs (c) and (d) of this AD. 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (14 CFR part 39) as follows: Replacement (c) Within 500 flight hours after the Federal Aviation Administration PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS effective date of this AD: Replace suspect DIRECTIVES relay K1XC with a new relay having a 14 CFR Part 39 manufacturing date code other than 0011 1. The authority citation for part 39 through 0050, in accordance with [Docket No. 2001–NE–37–AD] continues to read as follows: Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A601R– RIN 2120–AA64 24–105, Revision ‘‘A’’, dated July 20, 2001. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Note 3: Replacement of suspect relay K1XC Airworthiness Directives; CFM § 39.13 [Amended] accomplished prior to the effective date of International CFM56–5B and –7B 2. Section 39.13 is amended by this AD in accordance with Bombardier Alert Series Turbofan Engines Service Bulletin A601R–24–105, dated July 4, adding the following new airworthiness 2001, is considered acceptable for AGENCY: Federal Aviation directive: compliance with the applicable action Administration, DOT. specified in this amendment. Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly Canadair): ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking Docket 2001–NM–346–AD. (d) Within 1,000 flight hours after the (NPRM). Applicability: Model CL–600–2B19 series effective date of this AD: Replace suspect airplanes, serial numbers 7003 through 7495 relays K2XD and K3XD with new relays SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation inclusive, 7497 through 7502 inclusive, and having a manufacturing date code other then Administration (FAA) proposes to adopt 7505 through 7507 inclusive; certificated in 0011 through 0050, in accordance with a new airworthiness directive (AD) that any category. Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A601R– 24–105, Revision ‘‘A’’, dated July 20, 2001. is applicable to CFM International Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane (CFMI) CFM56–5B and –7B series identified in the preceding applicability Note 4: Replacement of suspect relays K2XD and K3XD accomplished prior to the turbofan engines. This proposal would provision, regardless of whether it has been require retirement of stage 2 LPT nozzle modified, altered, or repaired in the area effective date of this AD in accordance with subject to the requirements of this AD. For Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A601R– segments and stage 3 LPT nozzle airplanes that have been modified, altered, or 24–105, dated July 4, 2001, is considered segments, listed in Table 1 of this repaired so that the performance of the acceptable for compliance with the proposed AD, from service before requirements of this AD is affected, the applicable action specified in this accumulating 25,000 cycles-since-new owner/operator must request approval for an amendment. (CSN), or by October 31, 2008, alternative method of compliance in Spares whichever occurs earlier. This proposal accordance with paragraph (f) of this AD. The would also require installation of new request should include an assessment of the (e) As of the effective date of this AD, no design (either new or reworked) nozzle person shall install a Leach ‘‘H’’ series effect of the modification, alteration, or repair segments, that would aid in on the unsafe condition addressed by this electrical relay having P/N H–A4A–039 that AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been has a manufacturing date code of 0011 containment of the LPT rotor in the eliminated, the request should include through 0050 on any airplane. event of LPT shaft failure. This proposal is prompted by a report of an LPT shaft specific proposed actions to address it. Alternative Methods of Compliance Compliance: Required as indicated, unless failure caused by a hydromechanical (f) An alternative method of compliance or accomplished previously. unit (HMU) malfunction that induced a adjustment of the compliance time that To prevent the failure of an electrical relay higher than anticipated LPT rotor provides an acceptable level of safety may be due to a defective moving blade assembly, overspeed. The actions specified by the used if approved by the Manager, New York which could result in the inability to Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. proposed AD are intended to aid in generate electrical power from the emergency Operators shall submit their requests through containment of the LPT rotor in the system, if needed, accomplish the following: an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance event of LPT shaft failure, which could Inspection Inspector, who may add comments and then result in uncontained engine failure and (a) Within 14 days after the effective date send it to the Manager, New York ACO. damage to the airplane. of this AD: Perform an inspection to Note 5: Information concerning the DATES: Comments must be received by determine whether installed Leach ‘‘H’’ existence of approved alternative methods of June 3, 2002. compliance with this AD, if any, may be series power transfer relays K1XC, K2XD, ADDRESSES: Submit comments in obtained from the New York ACO. and K3XD, all having part number (P/N) H– triplicate to the Federal Aviation A4A–039, have a manufacturing date code of 0011 through 0050. The inspection for such Special Flight Permits Administration (FAA), New England ‘‘suspect relays’’ is to be performed in (g) Special flight permits may be issued in Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, accordance with Bombardier Alert Service accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NE– Bulletin A601R–24–105, Revision ‘‘A’’, dated Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 37–AD, 12 New England Executive Park, July 20, 2001. and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a Burlington, MA 01803–5299. Comments
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 16070 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules
may be inspected at this location, by FAA, New England Region, Office of the Regulatory Analysis appointment, between 8 a.m. and 4:30 Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules This proposed rule does not have p.m., Monday through Friday, except Docket No. 2001–NE–37–AD, 12 New federalism implications, as defined in Federal holidays. Comments may also England Executive Park, Burlington, MA Executive Order 13132, because it be sent via the Internet using the 01803–5299. would not have a substantial direct following address: ‘‘9-ane- Discussion effect on the States, on the relationship [email protected]’’. Comments sent between the national government and via the Internet must contain the docket On August 7, 2001, the FAA received the States, or on the distribution of number in the subject line. a report of a CFM56–7B turbofan engine power and responsibilities among the The service information referenced in LPT shaft failure. CFMI determined that various levels of government. the proposed rule may be obtained from this failure was caused by an HMU Accordingly, the FAA has not consulted CFM International, Technical malfunction that induced an LPT rotor with state authorities prior to Publications Department, 1 Neumann overspeed. To aid in containment of the publication of this proposed rule. Way, Cincinnati, OH 45215; telephone LPT rotor in the event of LPT shaft For the reasons discussed above, I (513) 552–2800; fax (513) 552–2816. failure, the FAA proposes to require: certify that this proposed regulation (1) This information may be examined, by • is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ appointment, at the FAA, New England Retirement of stage 2 LPT nozzle under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, segments and stage 3 LPT nozzle a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT 12 New England Executive Park, segments, listed in Table 1 of this Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 Burlington, MA. proposed AD, from service before accumulating 25,000 CSN, or by October FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: promulgated, will not have a significant James Rosa, Aerospace Engineer, Engine 31, 2008, whichever occurs earlier. These limits are based on economic impact, positive or negative, Certification Office, FAA, Engine and on a substantial number of small entities Propeller Directorate, 12 New England manufacturer’s analysis. • under the criteria of the Regulatory Executive Park, telephone (781) 238– Installation of new design (either Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft 7152; fax (781) 238–7199. new or reworked) nozzle segments, that regulatory evaluation prepared for this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: facilitate the axial clashing between the action is contained in the Rules Docket. stage 3 LPT blades and stage 4 nozzle Comments Invited A copy of it may be obtained by airfoils. contacting the Rules Docket at the Interested persons are invited to location provided under the caption participate in the making of the FAA’s Determination of an Unsafe ADDRESSES. proposed rule by submitting such Condition and Proposed Actions written data, views, or arguments as Since an unsafe condition has been List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 they may desire. Communications identified that is likely to exist or Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation should identify the Rules Docket develop on other CFM International safety, Safety. number and be submitted in triplicate to (CFMI) CFM56–5B and –7B series The Proposed Amendment the address specified above. All turbofan engines of the same type communications received on or before design, the proposed AD would require Accordingly, pursuant to the the closing date for comments, specified retirement of stage 2 LPT nozzle authority delegated to me by the above, will be considered before taking segments and stage 3 LPT nozzle Administrator, the Federal Aviation action on the proposed rule. The segments, listed in Table 1 of this Administration proposes to amend part proposals contained in this action may proposed AD, from service before 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations be changed in light of the comments accumulating 25,000 cycles-since-new, (14 CFR part 39) as follows: received. or by October 31, 2008, whichever Comments are specifically invited on occurs earlier. The proposed AD would PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS the overall regulatory, economic, also require installation of new design DIRECTIVES environmental, and energy aspects of (either new or reworked) nozzle the proposed rule. All comments 1. The authority citation for part 39 segments, that would aid in submitted will be available, both before continues to read as follows: containment of the LPT rotor in the and after the closing date for comments, Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. event of LPT shaft failure. in the Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report Economic Analysis § 39.13 [Amended] summarizing each FAA-public contact 2. Section 39.13 is amended by concerned with the substance of this There are approximately 3,187 CFM adding the following new airworthiness proposal will be filed in the Rules International (CFMI) CFM56–5B and directive: Docket. –7B series engines of the affected design CFM International: Docket No. 2001–NE–37– Commenters wishing the FAA to in the worldwide fleet. The FAA AD. estimates that 910 engines installed on acknowledge receipt of their comments Applicability submitted in response to this action airplanes of U.S. registry would be must submit a self-addressed, stamped affected by this proposed AD. The FAA This airworthiness directive (AD) is applicable to CFM International (CFMI) postcard on which the following also estimates that it would take approximately 10 work hours per engine CFM56–5B and –7B series turbofan engines. statement is made: ‘‘Comments to These engines are installed on, but not Docket Number 2001–NE–37–AD.’’ The to perform the proposed actions, and limited to Boeing 737–600, –700, –800, and postcard will be date stamped and that the average labor rate is $60 per –900; and Airbus A319, A320, and A321 returned to the commenter. work hour. Required parts would cost airplanes. approximately $34,984 per engine. Availability of NPRM’s Note 1: This AD applies to each engine Based on these figures, the total cost of identified in the preceding applicability Any person may obtain a copy of this the proposed AD on U.S. operators is provision, regardless of whether it has been NPRM by submitting a request to the estimated to be $32,381,440. modified, altered, or repaired in the area
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules 16071
subject to the requirements of this AD. For and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. engines that have been modified, altered, or location where the requirements of this AD Phone (202) 219–2595; Fax: (202) 219– repaired so that the performance of the can be done. 2632; E-Mail; [email protected]. requirements of this AD is affected, the Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on owner/operator must request approval for an Raymond Reid (Technical Issues), March 29, 2002. alternative method of compliance in Office of Executive Director, Division of accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD. Robert G. Mann, Regulatory Accounting Policy, Federal The request should include an assessment of Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 the effect of the modification, alteration, or Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. repair on the unsafe condition addressed by [FR Doc. 02–8173 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Phone (202) 219–2928; Fax: (202) 219– this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 2632; E-Mail; [email protected]. been eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to address it. Julia Lake (Legal Issues), Office of General Counsel, Federal Energy Compliance DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Regulatory Commission, 888 First Compliance with this AD is required before Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Federal Energy Regulatory accumulating 25,000 cycles-since-new on the Phone (202) 208–2019; E-Mail; Commission parts listed in Table 1 of this AD, or by [email protected]. October 31, 2008, whichever occurs earlier, unless already done. 18 CFR Chapter I SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In To aid in containment of the LPT rotor in [Docket No. RM02–7–000] addition to publishing the full text of the event of LPT shaft failure, which could this document in the Federal Register, result in uncontained engine failure and damage to the airplane, do the following: Accounting and Reporting of Asset it is available for inspection in the (a) Retire from service stage 2 LPT nozzle Retirement Obligations Commission’s Public Reference Room at segments and stage 3 LPT nozzle segments 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, listed in the following Table 1, and install AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Washington, DC 20426, during regular new design (either new or reworked) nozzle Commission, DOE. business hours and is posted on both segments: ACTION: Notice of informal technical the Commission’s Issuance Posting conference, agenda and request for System (CIPS) and the Records and TABLE 1.—STAGE 2 AND STAGE 3 comments. Information Management Systems LPT NOZZLE SEGMENT PART NUM- (RIMS), and may be viewed and printed SUMMARY: The Federal Energy BERS TO BE RETIRED remotely via the Internet through Regulatory Commission (Commission) Commission’s Home Page (http:// Nozzle seg- previously issued a Notice of Informal www.ferc.gov). ments Part numbers Technical Conference on March 8, 2002. Today’s notice announces that the Notice of Informal Technical (1) Stage 2 ..... 338–109–104–0, 338–109– technical conference will be held on Conference, Agenda and Request for 105–0, 338–109–106–0, Tuesday, May 7, 2002, starting at 9 Comments 338–109–204–0, 338– A.M., in the Commission’s Meeting March 29, 2002. 109–205–0, 338–109– Room, 888 First Street, NE., 206–0, 338–109–304–0, Washington, DC. The Conference will Take notice that on Tuesday, May 7, 338–109–305–0, 338– 1 address the financial accounting, 2002, the Commission staff will hold a 109–306–0. technical conference to discuss the (2) Stage 3 ..... 338–109–702–0, 338–109– reporting and related ratemaking 802–0. implications related to asset retirement financial accounting, reporting and obligations associated with the ratemaking implications related to asset (b) Information on reworking stage 2 LPT retirement of tangible long-lived assets. retirement obligations associated with nozzle segments and stage 3 LPT nozzle This notice provides the format for the the retirement of tangible long-lived segments, listed in Table 1 of this AD, can conference, the agenda and requests for assets. The conference will begin at 9:00 be found in CFM International Service comments and provides further details A.M. and is scheduled for the Bulletins (SB’s) 720328, dated May 25, 2000, regarding the technical conference. All Commission Meeting Room, at the for CFM56–5 series engines, and SB 720241, interested parties are invited to attend. offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory dated May 25, 2000, for CFM56–7 series Commission, 888 First Street, NE., DATES: Written comments should be engines. Washington, DC. All interested parties submitted on or before April 29, 2002 in Alternative Methods of Compliance are invited to attend. This conference is the above-captioned proceeding. (c) An alternative method of compliance or being convened to enlist the ADDRESSES: adjustment of the compliance time that Send comments to: Office of participation of CPA firms, industry provides an acceptable level of safety may be the Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory associations, jurisdictional entities, state used if approved by the Manager, Engine Commission, 888 First Street, NE., commissions, other regulatory bodies, Certification Office (ECO). Operators must Washington, DC 20426. The comments rural electric cooperatives 2 and other submit their request through an appropriate may be filed electronically via the FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 1 may add comments and then send it to the See 67 FR 11954 (Mar. 18, 2002). The initial 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions notice indicated that the technical conference Manager, ECO. on the Commission’s web site at http:/ would be held on, Tuesday and Wednesday, May Note 2: Information concerning the /www.ferc.gov/ and click on ‘‘Make an 7 and 8, 2002. However, Commission has decided existence of approved alternative methods of Electronic Filing,’’ and follow the at this time not to extend the technical conference to Wednesday, May 8, 2002. compliance with this airworthiness directive, instructions for each screen. if any, may be obtained from the ECO. 2 The Rural Utilities Service (RUS) and its rural FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: electric cooperatives have an interest in this Special Flight Permits Mark Klose (Project Manager), Office of proceeding because RUS’s Uniform System of Accounts for its rural electric cooperative utilities (d) Special flight permits may be issued in Executive Director, Division of incorporates accounting requirements which are accordance with §§ 21.197 and 21.199 of the Regulatory Accounting Policy, Federal similar to the Commission’s uniform System of Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Accounts for public utilities 18 CFR Part 101.
VerDate 11
interested parties to address the obligations. The goal of the conference (Legal Issues), at (202) 208–2019 or financial accounting, reporting and is to identify how recognition of asset [email protected]. ratemaking implications related to asset retirement obligations may affect the Linwood A. Watson, Jr., retirement obligations associated with Commission’s existing accounting and the retirement of tangible long-lived rate regulations. Deputy Secretary. assets. In order to aid Commission staff’s Attachment 1; Accounting and Rate This notice provides the format for evaluation of the accounting, reporting Treatment for Asset Retirement the technical conference, the agenda, a and ratemaking implications of Obligations request for comments and further details recognizing asset retirement obligations, Conference Agenda regarding the technical conference. we invite all interested parties to submit Panels that have been formed are shown written comments to the questions in Tuesday, May 7, 2002. in Attachment 1. Attachment 2 are Attachment 2 on or before April 29, Opening Remarks 9 a.m–9:15 a.m. questions that can be addressed in 2002, in the above-captioned FERC Staff written comments. proceeding. All comments will be Panel 1 9:15 a.m. –10:45 a.m. The Commission staff will discuss CPA Firms placed in the Commission’s public files Break 10:45 a.m.–11 a.m. with the panelist the following topics: and will be available for inspection in 1. The types of fixed assets that have Panel 2 11 a.m.–12:30 p.m. the Commission’s Public Reference Edison Electric Institute an asset retirement obligation that Room at 888 First Street, NE., Interstate Natural Gas Association of would be recognized and measured Washington, DC 20426, during regular America under such a requirement. business hours. Additionally, all Association of Oil Pipelines 2. The impact asset retirement comments may be viewed, printed, or Public Utilities and Licensees obligations have on depreciation downloaded remotely via the Internet Natural Gas Pipelines accounting and depreciation through FERC’s Homepage using the Oil Pipelines procedures. RIMS link. User assistance for RIMS is Lunch break 12:30 p.m.–1:30 p.m. 3. The accounting implementation available at (202) 208–2222, or by e-mail Panel 3 1:30 p.m.–3 p.m. issues related to the recognition of asset to [email protected]. National Association of Regulatory retirement obligations for existing and Commissioners future long-lived assets. Comments related to this proceeding Rural Utilities Services 4. The impact on the Uniform may be filed either in paper format or National Rural Electric Cooperative Systems of Accounts and the electronically. Those filing Association Commission’s rate regulations. electronically do not need to make a Rural Electric Cooperatives The Commission’s existing Uniform paper filing. For paper filings, the Break 3 p.m.–3:15 p.m. Systems of Accounts 3 do not address original and 14 copies of the comments Panel 4 3:15 p.m.–4 p.m. Other Parties the accounting and reporting of the asset should be submitted to the Office of the retirement obligations.4 There are a Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory * * * * * number of implementation issues Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426 and should refer Attachment 2; Questions To Be Addressed in related to the accounting requirements Request for Comments to Docket No. RM02–7–000. Comments for asset retirement obligations that are In order to aid Commission staff’s capable of different interpretations. filed electronically via the Internet must be prepared in WordPerfect, MS Word, evaluation of the accounting, reporting and These interpretations could result in ratemaking implications related to inconsistent accounting treatment Portable Document Format, or ASCII recognizing asset retirement obligations, we between companies, and have format. To file the comments, access the invite interested parties to submit written unintended effects on cost-of-service Commission’s website at www.ferc.gov comments on the following questions and and formula rates. The main purpose for and click on ‘‘Make an Electronic any other questions which will aid the convening this technical conference is Filing,’’ and follow the instructions for Commission staff in assessing the implications of recognizing asset retirement to afford an opportunity for the electric, each screen. First time users will have to establish a user name and password. obligations for regulatory purposes. natural gas and oil pipeline industries 1. Should legal obligations related to asset and other interested parties to discuss The Commission will send an automatic acknowledgment to the sender’s E-mail retirement obligations be recognized in with the Commission staff issues related Commission Annual Reports, FERC Forms 1, to the implementation of accounting address upon receipt of comments. User 1–F, 2, 2–A, and 6? 5 If not, what is the requirements for asset retirement assistance for electronic filing is authoritative support for this position? Please available at (202) 208–0258 or by e-mail explain. 3 See 18 CFR Part 101 (2001), Uniform System of to [email protected]. Comments should 2. If legal obligations related to asset Accounts Prescribed for Public Utilities and not be submitted to the e-mail address. retirements should be recognized for Licensees Subject to the Provisions of the Federal The conference will be transcribed. regulatory financial accounting and reporting Power Act; 18 CFR Part 201 (2001), Uniform System purposes, should they be recognized on the of Accounts Prescribed for Natural Gas Companies Those interested in obtaining transcripts same basis and in the same manner as Subject to the Provisions of the Natural Gas Act; need to contact ACE Federal Reporters, required for external and Securities and and 18 CFR Part 352 (2001), Uniform System of at (202) 347–3700 or (800) 336–6646. Exchange Commission financial reporting? If Accounts Prescribed for Oil Pipeline Companies Subject to the Provisions of the Interstate Commerce Transcriptions will be placed in the not, please explain the reasons for any Act. public record ten days after the different accounting treatment? 4 The Commission’s Chief Accountant issued conference. interim accounting guidance stating that public 5 FERC Form No. 1, Annual Report of Major utilities and licensees, natural gas companies, and For further information contact about Public Utilities, Licensees and Others (Form 1); oil pipelines may not early adopt this accounting the conference, please contact either: FERC Form No. 1–F, Annual Report of Nonmajor standard for financial accounting and reporting to Mark Klose (Project Manager), at (202) Public Utilities and Licensees (Form 1–F); FERC the Commission until it acts on this matter. See All 219–2595 or [email protected], Form No. 2, Annual Report of Major Natural Gas Jurisdictional Public Utilities, Licensees, Natural Companies (Form 2); FERC Form No. 2–A, Annual Gas Companies, and Oil Pipeline Companies, Raymond Reid (Technical Issues), at Report of Nonmajor Natural Gas Companies (Form Docket No. AI02–1–000, issued February 20, 2002, (202) 219–2928 or 2–A); and Form No. 6, Annual Report of Oil found at http://www.ferc.gov/news/ai02–1–000.htm. [email protected] or Julia Lake Pipeline Companies (Form 6).
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules 16073
3. What specific categories of existing fixed with its retirement, and the component’s ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION assets have asset retirement obligations that useful life is shorter than the life of the larger AGENCY would be recognized and measured under system asset of which it is a part, must a such requirements? Please provide an liability for the asset retirement obligation be 40 CFR Part 180 approximation of the additional asset recognized for the component and the asset retirement obligation liability that would be retirement costs be depreciated over the [OPP–301226; FRL–6828–8] recognized under this requirement, the net component useful life? At the date of RIN 2070–AC18 income effect, and other related financial adoption will there be sufficient information consequences. Please explain. and records related to such components to Methoxychlor; Proposed Revocation of 4. Under the Uniform Systems of Accounts, recognize and measure the related asset what existing or new balance sheet accounts Tolerances retirement obligations? Please explain. should be used to record the capitalized asset 16. How should any balances remaining at AGENCY: Environmental Protection retirement costs? Also, what existing or new the date of settlement of liabilities for asset primary plant account(s) should be used to Agency (EPA). record the capitalized asset retirement costs? retirement obligations be accounted for? ACTION: Proposed rule. Please explain. Please explain. 5. What records should be maintained to 17. How will the recognition of asset SUMMARY: This document proposes to support the capitalized asset retirement costs retirement obligations affect the revoke specific tolerances for residues of and related liability for the asset retirement Commission’s accounting for capital and methoxychlor because (1) all obligations? Please explain. operating leases? Under the Uniform Systems registrations of pesticides containing 6. Under the Uniform Systems of Accounts, of Accounts, what new or existing balance methoxychlor are suspended or what existing or new accounts for sheet and income statement accounts should canceled, and (2) there are insufficient depreciation expense and accumulated be used by a lessor and lessee to account for data to find the pesticide safe in asset retirement obligations associated with depreciation should be used to record accordance with section 4(b)(2)(A) of depreciation on the capitalized asset either capital leases or operating leases? retirement costs? Please explain. Please explain. the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 7. What detailed depreciation records are 18. Does ‘‘spent nuclear fuel’’ and ‘‘storage Act (FFDCA). The primary registrant of needed for the capitalized asset retirement casks used for interim storage of spent fuel’’ methoxychlor (Kincaid Enterprises, Inc.) costs? Please explain. result in legal asset retirement obligations? 7 has failed to submit the necessary data 8. Under the Uniform Systems of Accounts, If so, under the Uniform Systems of required to support continued what existing or new accounts should be Accounts, what new or existing balance sheet registration under the Federal used to record liabilities for asset retirement and income statement accounts should be Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide obligations and the related time value of used to record the amounts related to the Act (FIFRA) of pesticide products money (accretion expense)? Please explain. asset retirement obligations for ‘‘spent containing methoxychlor. As a result, 9. What records should be maintained to nuclear fuel’’ and the ‘‘storage cask used for support the entries and the amounts included all methoxychlor products are currently interim storage of spent fuel’’? Please suspended. The regulatory actions in the liability account so that companies can explain. furnish complete information for each 19. What are the issues involved in proposed in this document contribute specific liability related to each property that reconciling the new accounting requirements toward the Agency’s tolerance gives rise to a liability for an asset retirement for asset retirement obligations with existing reassessment requirements of the obligation? Please explain. rate practices which may recover asset Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 10. How does the accounting for asset retirement obligations, all or in part, through (FFDCA) section 408(q), as amended by retirement obligations impact the Uniform general rates, depreciation or negative Systems of Accounts’ definitions for the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) Depreciation, Service Value, Net Salvage, salvage (or decommissioning) allowances? of 1996. By law, EPA is required by Salvage Value, Cost of Removal and Service How should the transition to the new rule August 2002 to reassess 66% of the Life? 6 Please explain. reflect that such costs (i.e., negative salvage) tolerances in existence on August 2, 11. What revisions should be made to the may have already been recovered in existing 1996, or about 6,400 tolerances. The Uniform Systems of Accounts’ definitions for rates? regulatory actions proposed in this 20. What are the implications of asset Depreciation, Service Value, Net Salvage, document pertain to the proposed Salvage Value, Cost of Removal and Service retirement obligations accounting model that may result in higher total expenses in the revocation of 79 tolerances and/or Life as a result the accounting for asset exemptions which would be counted retirement to differentiate between the cost of later years of an asset’s life than in earlier removal that is not recognized as a liability years because of compounding interest among tolerance/exemption for cost of removal versus the cost of removal effect? reassessments made toward the August recognized as a liability for an asset 21. For rate making purposes, how can 2002 review deadline. retirement obligation? Please explain. interim events involving system components, DATES: Comments, identified by docket 12. What are the implications of the such as asset retirements, sales or spin downs control number OPP–301226, must be accounting for asset retirement obligations on be properly reflected if the asset retirement received on or before June 3, 2002. depreciation procedures (group method obligations were not recognized for the ADDRESSES: Comments may be versus component method)? Please explain. components? 13. How should a regulated entity account submitted by mail, electronically, or in for the transition adjustment related to the [FR Doc. 02–8133 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] person. Please follow the detailed adoption of accounting for asset retirement BILLING CODE 6717–01–P instructions for each method as obligations? Please explain. provided in Unit I. of the 14. At the date of adoption of the 7 Nuclear fuel discharged from reactors at the end SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure accounting pronouncement, how would a of useful life is referred to as spent fuel and is proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative jurisdictional entity account for asset highly radioactive. It is stored either in storage that you identify docket control number retirement obligations associated with plant pools or dry cask storage facilities, until a OPP–301226 in the subject line on the or facilities that have been closed or repository is made available for permanent first page of your response. abandoned (i.e. retired but not physically disposal. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is removed)? Please explain. to provide for the ultimate disposal of spent fuel FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By 15. If an existing component part of a larger waste under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, mail: Beth Edwards, Special Review and as amended. To fund the DOE’s contractual system asset has a legal obligation associated obligations, each nuclear utility pays an ongoing Reregistration Division (7508C), Office fee, in addition to a one-time payment to cover of Pesticide Programs, Environmental 6 18 CFR Parts 101, 201 and 352 (2001). disposal of fuel utilized prior to April 7, 1983. Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 16074 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules
Ave, NW., Washington, DC 20460; OPP–301226. The official record number OPP–301226. Electronic telephone number: (703) 305–5400; e- consists of the documents specifically comments may also be filed online at mail address: [email protected]. referenced in this action, and other many Federal Depository Libraries. information related to this action, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: D. How Should I Handle CBI that I Want including any information claimed as to Submit to the Agency? I. General Information Confidential Business Information (CBI). A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This official record includes the Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to be You may be affected by this action if documents that are physically located in CBI. You may claim information that you are an agricultural producer, food the docket, as well as the documents you submit to EPA in response to this manufacturer, or pesticide that are referenced in those documents. document as CBI by marking any part or manufacturer. Potentially affected The public version of the official record all of that information as CBI. categories and entities may include, but does not include any information Information so marked will not be are not limited to: claimed as CBI. The public version of the official record, which includes disclosed except in accordance with printed, paper versions of any electronic procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. comments submitted during an In addition to one complete version of Examples of Po- applicable comment period is available the comment that includes any NAICS for inspection in the Public Information information claimed as CBI, a copy of Categories Codes tentially Affected Entities and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), the comment that does not contain the Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson information claimed as CBI must be Industry 111 Crop production Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, from 8:30 submitted for inclusion in the public 112 Animal produc- a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, tion version of the official record. 311 Food manufac- excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB Information not marked confidential turing telephone number is (703) 305–5805. will be included in the public version 32532 Pesticide manu- C. How and to Whom Do I Submit of the official record without prior facturing Comments? notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, This listing is not intended to be You may submit comments through please consult the person listed under exhaustive, but rather provides a guide the mail, in person, or electronically. To FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. for readers regarding entities likely to be ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is affected by this action. Other types of imperative that you identify docket E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare entities not listed in the table could also control number OPP–301226 in the My Comments for EPA? be affected. The North American subject line on the first page of your You may find the following Industrial Classification System response. suggestions helpful for preparing your (NAICS) codes have been provided to 1. By mail. Submit your comments to: comments: assist you and others in determining Public Information and Records 1. Explain your views as clearly as whether or not this action might apply Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Information possible. to certain entities. If you have questions Resources and Services Division 2. Describe any assumptions that you regarding the applicability of this action (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs used. to a particular entity, consult the person (OPP), Environmental Protection 3. Provide copies of any technical listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., information and/or data you used that CONTACT. Washington, DC 20460. support your views. 2. In person or by courier. Deliver 4. If you estimate potential burden or B. How Can I Get Additional your comments to: Public Information costs, explain how you arrived at the Information, Including Copies of this and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), estimate that you provide. Document and Other Related Information Resources and Services 5. Provide specific examples to Documents? Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide illustrate your concerns. 1. Electronically. You may obtain Programs (OPP), Environmental 6. Offer alternative ways to improve electronic copies of this document, and Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal the proposed rule or collection activity. certain other related documents that Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., 7. Make sure to submit your might be available electronically, from Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from comments by the deadline in this the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through document. www.epa.gov/. To access this Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, document, on the Home Page select PIRIB telephone number is (703) 305– be sure to identify the docket control ‘‘Laws and Regulations,’’ ‘‘Regulations 5805. number assigned to this action in the and Proposed Rules,’’ and then look up 3. Electronically. You may submit subject line on the first page of your the entry for this document under the your comments electronically by e-mail response. You may also provide the ‘‘Federal Register—Environmental to: [email protected], or you can name, date, and Federal Register Documents.’’ You can also go directly to submit a computer disk as described in citation. the Federal Register listings at http:// this unit. Do not submit any information www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. A frequently electronically that you consider to be F. What Can I Do if I Wish the Agency updated electronic version of 40 CFR CBI. Electronic comments must be to Maintain a Tolerance that the Agency part 180 is available at http:// submitted as an ASCII file avoiding use Proposes to Revoke? www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/ of special characters and any form of This proposed rule provides a cfrhtml_180/Title_40/40cfr180_00.html, encryption. Comments and data will comment period of 60 days for any a beta site currently under development. also be accepted on standard disks in person to state an interest in retaining 2. In person. The Agency has WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII file a tolerance proposed for revocation. If established an official record for this format. All comments in electronic form EPA receives a comment within the 60– action under docket control number must be identified by docket control day period to that effect, EPA will not
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules 16075
proceed to revoke the tolerance Methoxychlor as the Active Ingredient requirements as required by the DCI and immediately. However, EPA will take (i.e., Methoxychlor Registration the ALJ’s Order/Settlement Agreement. steps to ensure the submission of any Standard). The Registration Standard The Agency requested that the ALJ enter needed supporting data and will issue included a Data Call-In Notice (DCI) a suspension order and a suspension an order in the Federal Register under issued pursuant to FIFRA section order was entered for all methoxychlor FFDCA section 408(f) if needed. The 3(c)(2)(B), which required registrants of pesticide product registrations held by order would specify data needed and products containing methoxychlor used Kincaid. The suspension became the time frames for its submission, and as the active ingredient to develop and effective on January 14, 2000. would require that within 90 days some submit certain data. The Administrator Subsequently, Kincaid missed a second person or persons notify EPA that they had determined these data to be deadline of March 3, 2000, for a number will submit the data. If the data are not necessary to support continued of other studies. The Agency filed a submitted as required in the order, EPA registration of pesticide products request to the ALJ that he amend the will take appropriate action under containing methoxychlor as the active January 14, 2000 suspension order to FFDCA. ingredient. Failure to comply with the include these studies, and on April 12, EPA will issue a final rule after requirements of a Data Call-In Notice is 2000, the ALJ amended the January 14, considering comments that are a basis for suspension under section 2000 suspension order to include the submitted in response to this proposed 3(c)(2)(B) of FIFRA. rule. In addition to submitting Kincaid Enterprises Inc. (Kincaid) was additional overdue studies as bases for comments in response to this proposal, the sole registrant who committed to suspension. you may also submit an objection at the produce the generic data for Because Kincaid failed to submit the time of the final rule. If you fail to file methoxychlor. All other registrants of data in violation of the 1988 DCI and the an objection to the final rule within the end-use products requested a Generic accelerated decision and order time period specified, you will have Data Exemption (GDE) in response to incorporating the Settlement Agreement waived the right to raise any issues the DCI. These GDE requests were and was no longer in compliance with resolved in the final rule. After the granted which allowed the end-use the DCI, registrants of methoxychlor specified time, issues resolved in the registrants to rely on Kincaid’s data. end-use products who were previously final rule cannot be raised again in any On April 7, 1998, the Agency issued eligible for the GDE were also subsequent proceedings. a Notice of Intent to Suspend to Kincaid considered to be in noncompliance with II. Background because of their failure to submit certain the 1988 DCI requirements as amended data required by the DCI. On May 13, by the accelerated decision and order A. What Action is the Agency Taking? 1998, Kincaid requested a hearing by incorporating the Settlement The Agency is not able to make a filing a hearing request with the Agency. Agreement. Letters were mailed to all On September 3, 1998, Kincaid and the finding that existing tolerances for end-use registrants on April 14, 2000, Agency entered into a settlement methoxychlor are safe. Based on notifying them that their GDEs for agreement that specified the outstanding currently available information, the products containing methoxychlor were data requirements from the 1988 DCI Agency has significant concerns with revoked. The letters explained that if the effects of methyoxychlor on human and set forth a new schedule for their submission. The Settlement Agreement these data requirements were not health and the environment. satisfied within 30 days, registrants who Furthermore, as of mid 2000, all product stated that if Kincaid failed to comply had received the DCI would be subject registrations of methoxychlor are either with any of the terms and conditions to a Notice of Intent to Suspend and suspended due to registrants’ relating to any of the requirements for those whose registrations had been noncompliance with a Data Call-In data generation and submission, the notice issued under FIFRA section Agency would request that the granted subsequent to issuance of the 3(c)(2)(B) or canceled pursuant to Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issue an DCI would be subject to a Notice of registrants voluntary cancellation order suspending the registrations of Intent to Cancel. No data were received. request under FIFRA section 6(f). EPA Kincaid’s affected products without any Notices of Intent to Suspend were believes that all existing stocks of opportunity for a hearing. On September issued on June 26, 2000. No Notices of pesticide products labeled for the uses 14, 1998, the ALJ issued an accelerated Intent to Cancel were necessary because associated with the tolerances proposed decision and order incorporating the all products registered after the issuance for revocation have already been Settlement Agreement. The Judge’s of the DCI were voluntarily canceled. exhausted. A detailed description of the accelerated decision and order No hearings were requested, and events leading to the methoxychlor incorporating the Settlement Agreement therefore, pursuant to sections suspension follows. was entered into the public docket for 3(c)(2)(B)(iv) and 6(e)(2), the proposed On December 9, 1988, EPA issued the the matter. suspensions became final. The data Guidance for the Reregistration of Subsequently, on December 3, 1999, requirements that are overdue are as Pesticide Products Containing Kincaid failed to satisfy certain data follows:
Guideline Study Due Date
Guideline 161-3 Photodegradation - soil 12/3/99 Guideline 163-1 Leaching/adsorption/desorption 12/3/99 Guideline 83-3 Teratogenicity - rat 3/3/00 Guideline 83-3 Teratogenicity - rabbit 3/3/00 Guideline 162-2 Anaerobic metabolism 3/3/00 Guideline 171-4 Storage stability 3/3/00 Guideline 171-4 Magnitude of residue - meat, milk 3/3/00 Guideline 85-1 General metabolism 9/3/01
Additional data requirements that are still outstanding are:
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4706 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 16076 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules
Guideline Study Due Date
Guideline 83–1 Chronic toxicity - rodent 9/3/02 Guideline 83–1 Chronic toxicity - non-rodent 9/3/02 Guideline 83–2 Oncogenicity - rat 9/3/02 Guideline 83–2 Oncogenicity - mouse 9/3/02 Guideline 83–4 Two-generation reproduction 9/3/02
The Agency has significant concerns dose level. The authors determined that exposure to the pesticide, such that the about the effects of methoxychlor on the reproductive effects of methoxychlor Agency cannot (in the absence of human health and the environment. are mediated in part by an increase in exculpatory data) determine that there is Methoxychlor is being used by the U.S. prolaction release which in turn a reasonable certainty of no harm (see and the Organization for Economic influences the hypothalamic levels of Unit II.B., below). Cooperation and Development (OECD) GnRH. This may be considered an early On February 19, 2002, the Agency as one of the key chemicals in validating effect of methoxychlor on the rat received a letter from Kincaid indicating components of the Endocrine reproductive system. that the company intends to formally Disruption Screening Program. Cummings and Gray (Ref. 1) of the request the cancellation of all crop uses Methoxychlor has been discussed U.S. EPA Health Effects Research for methoxychlor; however, the extensively in the public literature in Laboratory found that methoxychlor company intends to support the use of connection with endocrine disruption. affects the decidual cell response of the methoxychlor on livestock. rat uterus, suggesting a direct effect of Kupfer and Bulger (Ref. 5) found that B. What is the Agency’s Authority for the compound on the uterus with no both methoxychlor and metabolites Taking this Action? have estrogen-like activity with several effects on uterine weight, serum metabolites having proestrogen activity. progesterone levels, or corpora lutea A tolerance represents the maximum They used an in vitro system involving maintenance. Long-term exposure to level for residues of pesticide chemicals rat liver microsomes and nicotinamide methoxychlor reduced fertility and legally allowed in or on raw agricultural adenine dinucleotide phosphate induced fetotoxicity. The effects of commodities and processed foods. (NADPH) for a metabolizing system reduced fertility and fetotoxicity were Section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 301 et with estrogen receptors from immature noted in a 3-generation reproduction seq., as amended by the FQPA of 1996, rat uteri as a detection system. study. Although the available data for Public Law 104–170, authorizes the Gray et al. (Ref. 3) investigated the these three studies were limited, it is establishment of tolerances, exemptions effects of methoxychlor on the pubertal apparent that methoxychlor at 1,000 from tolerance requirements, development and reproductive function parts per million (ppm) produced modifications in tolerances, and in the male and female rat (Long-Evans reproductive effects in the form of revocation of tolerances for residues of hooded) by dosing rats from gestation, reduced fertility index, reduced litter pesticide chemicals in or on raw weaning, lactation, through puberty size, and reduced viability index. agricultural commodities and processed with either 25, 50, 100, or 200 Khera et al. (Ref. 4) on the foods (21 U.S.C. 346(a)). Without a milligrams/kilograms/day (mg/kg/day) teratogenicity of methoxychlor found tolerance or exemption, food containing of methoxychlor. In females they found that treatment of pregnant rats with pesticide residues is considered to be an acceleration of vaginal opening, either technical grade or formulation of unsafe and therefore adulterated under abnormal estrus cycle, inhibition of methoxychlor produced maternal section 402(a) of the FFDCA. If food luteal function and a blockage of toxicity in the form of reduced body containing pesticide residues is implantation. In males they found an weight gain at all doses tested (50 to 300 considered to be adulterated, you may inhibition of somatic growth and mg/kg/day). Developmental toxicity was not distribute the product in interstate accessory gland weight, elevated noted as fetotoxicity at doses of 200 and commerce (21 U.S.C. 331(a) and 342(a)). pituitary and serum prolactin levels, 400 mg/kg/day and as a dose-related For a food-use pesticide to be sold and and a suppression of testicular Leydig increase of wavy ribs at 100, 200, and distributed, the pesticide must not only cell function. Some of these effects 400 mg/kg/day. have appropriate tolerances under the occurred at levels as low as 25 mg/kg/ Methoxychlor is a member of the FFDCA, but also must be registered day. These observations are consistent organochlorine class of pesticides. Other under FIFRA (7 U.S.C. et seq.). Food-use with the earlier reports that members of this class include DDT, pesticides not registered in the United methoxychlor mimics estrogen both in chlorobenzilate, dicofol, and ethylan. States have tolerances for residues of vivo and in vitro. Less closely related members of the pesticides in or on commodities Goldman et al. (Ref. 2) investigated class include lindane, dieldrin, endrin, imported into the United States. the subchronic effects of methoxychlor chlordane, heptachlor, aldrin, FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(A) provides on the rat (Long-Evans hooded) endosulfan, depone, and toxaphene that the Administrator may establish or reproductive system by dosing for 8 (Ref. 6). Methoxychlor was developed as leave in effect a tolerance for a pesticide weeks with 25 mg/kg or 50 mg/kg of a replacement for DDT and is a chemical residue in or on a food only methoxychlor by oral gavage. No effect structural analog of DDT. Methoxychlor if the Administrator determines that the was observed on the pituitary weight, has also been identified as a persistent tolerance is safe. The section further serum lutenizing hormone (LH), follicle bioaccumulative toxic substance. Since provides that the term ‘‘safe,’’ with stimulating hormone (FSH), or prolactin there are data gaps for all of the major respect to a tolerance for a pesticide levels and the pituitary LH of FSH studies, there is no way to assess the chemical residue, means that the concentrations. Pituitary prolactin safety of the existing tolerances to either Administrator has determined that there levels were increased at both levels. the adult populations and especially to is a reasonable certainty that no harm There was an increase in gonadotropin- infants and children. Existing data will result from aggregate exposure to releasing hormone (GnRH) levels in the concerning methoxychlor suggest the pesticide chemical residue, mediobasal hypothalamus at the high- significant hazards resulting from including all anticipated dietary
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules 16077
exposures and all other exposures for uses for which FIFRA registrations no D. What Is the Contribution to Tolerance which there is reliable information. For longer exist or have been suspended, Reassessment? the reasons stated in Unit II.A., above, unless someone expresses a need for By law, EPA is required to reassess existing data concerning methoxychlor such tolerances. Through this proposed 66% or about 6,400 of the tolerances in suggest significant hazards resulting rule, the Agency is inviting individuals existence on August 2, 1996, by August from exposure to the pesticide, such who need these import tolerances to 2002. EPA is also required to assess the that the Agency cannot (in the absence identify themselves and the tolerances remaining tolerances by August 2006. of exculpatory data) determine that that are needed to cover imported As of March 8, 2002, EPA has reassessed there is a reasonable certainty of no commodities. over 3,910 tolerances. This document Parties interested in retention of the harm. In addition, EPA’s general proposes to revoke 79 tolerances which tolerances should be aware that practice is to propose revocation of would be counted as reassessments in a additional data may be needed to tolerances for residues of pesticide final rule toward the August 2002 active ingredients on crops for which support retention. These parties should be aware that, under FFDCA section review deadline of FFDCA section FIFRA registrations no longer exist and 408(q), as amended by FQPA in 1996. on which the pesticide may therefore no 408(f), if the Agency determines that additional information is reasonably For reassessment counting purposes, longer be used in the United States. The sweet potatoes and yams are counted as same principles apply to uses that have required to support the continuation of a tolerance, EPA may require that one tolerance and ‘‘with or without been suspended but not canceled. EPA tops’’ is counted as two tolerances each has historically been concerned that parties interested in maintaining the tolerances provide the necessary for beets, radishes, rutabagas, and retention of tolerances that are not turnips. necessary to cover residues in or on information. If the requisite information legally treated foods may encourage is not submitted, EPA may issue an III. Are The Proposed Actions misuse of pesticides within the United order revoking the tolerance at issue. Consistent with International States. Nonetheless, EPA will establish C. When Do These Actions Become Obligations? and maintain tolerances even when Effective? The tolerance revocations in this corresponding domestic uses are EPA is proposing that the tolerances proposal are not discriminatory and are canceled or suspended if the tolerances, for methoxychlor be revoked upon designed to ensure that both which EPA refers to as import publication of the final rule. EPA domestically produced and imported tolerances, are necessary to allow believes that all existing stocks of foods meet the food safety standards importation into the United States of pesticide products labeled for the uses established by the FFDCA. The same food containing such pesticide residues. associated with the tolerances proposed food safety standards apply to However, where there are no imported for revocation have already been domestically produced and imported commodities that require these import exhausted since such products have foods. EPA is working to ensure that the tolerances, the Agency believes it is been suspended since June 26, 2000. U.S. tolerance reassessment program appropriate to revoke tolerances for Similarly, the Agency believes that under FQPA does not disrupt unregistered pesticides in order to commodities legally treated with international trade. EPA considers prevent potential misuse. methoxychlor have by this time cleared Codex Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) Furthermore, as a general matter, the the channels of trade. Consequently, in setting U.S. tolerances and in Agency believes that retention of import these tolerances are no longer needed. If reassessing them. MRLs are established tolerances not needed to cover any you have comments regarding existing by the Codex Committee on Pesticide imported food may result in stocks and whether the effective date Residues, a committee within the Codex unnecessary restriction on trade of accounts for these stocks, please submit Alimentarius Commission, an pesticides and foods. Under section 408 comments as described under international organization formed to of the FFDCA, a tolerance may only be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. promote the coordination of established or maintained if EPA Any commodities listed in this international food standards. It is EPA’s determines that the tolerance is safe proposal treated with the pesticides policy to harmonize U.S. tolerances based on a number of factors, including subject to this proposal, and in the with Codex MRLs to the extent possible, an assessment of the aggregate exposure channels of trade following the provided that the MRLs achieve the to the pesticide and an assessment of tolerance revocations, shall be subject to level of protection required under the cumulative effects of such pesticide FFDCA section 408(l)(5), as established FFDCA. EPA’s effort to harmonize with and other substances that have a by FQPA. Under this section, any Codex MRLs is summarized in the common mechanism of toxicity. In residues of these pesticides in or on tolerance reassessment section of doing so, EPA must consider potential such food shall not render the food individual Reregistration Eligibility contributions to such exposure from all adulterated so long as it is shown to the Decision documents. The U.S. EPA has tolerances. If the cumulative risk is such satisfaction of the Food and Drug developed guidance concerning that the tolerances in aggregate are not Administration (FDA) that, (1) the submissions for import tolerance safe, then every one of these tolerances residue is present as the result of an support (65 FR 35069, June 1, 2000) is potentially vulnerable to revocation. application or use of the pesticide at a (FRL–6559–3). This guidance will be Furthermore, if unneeded tolerances are time and in a manner that was lawful made available to interested persons. included in the aggregate and under FIFRA, and (2) the residue does Electronic copies are available on the cumulative risk assessments, the not exceed the level that was authorized internet at http://www.epa.gov/. On the estimated exposure to the pesticide at the time of the application or use to Home Page select Laws and Regulations, would be inflated. Consequently, it may be present on the food under a tolerance then select Regulations and Proposed be more difficult for others to obtain or exemption from tolerance. Evidence Rules and then look up the entry for this needed tolerances or to register needed to show that food was lawfully treated document under Federal Register— new uses. To avoid potential trade may include records that verify the Environmental Documents. You can restrictions, the Agency is proposing to dates that the pesticide was applied to also go directly to the Federal Register revoke tolerances for residues on crops such food. listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 16078 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules
IV. References any other Agency action under government and the States, or on the 1. Cummings, A.M. and L.E. Gray. Executive Order 13045, entitled distribution of power and 1987. Methoxychlor affects the decidual Protection of Children from responsibilities among the various cell response of the uterus but not other Environmental Health Risks and Safety levels of government.’’ This proposed progestational parameters in female rats. Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). rule directly regulates growers, food Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 90(2): 330– This action does not involve any processors, food handlers and food 336. technical standards that would require retailers, not States. This action does not 2. Goldman, J.M., R.L. Cooper, G.L. Agency consideration of voluntary alter the relationships or distribution of Rehnberg, J.F. Hein, W.K. McElroy, and consensus standards pursuant to section power and responsibilities established L.E. Gray Jr. 1986. Effects of low 12(d) of the National Technology by Congress in the preemption subchronic doses of methoxychlor on Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). the rat hypothalamic-pituitary (NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section For these same reasons, the Agency has reproductive axis. Toxicol. Appl. 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Pursuant to determined that this proposed rule does Pharmacol. 86(3): 474–483. the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 not have any ‘‘tribal implications’’ as 3. Gray, L.E. Jr., J. Ostby, J. Ferrell et U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency described in Executive Order 13175, al. 1989. A dose-response analysis of previously assessed whether revocations entitled Consultation and Coordination methoxychlor-induced alterations of of tolerances might significantly impact with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR reproductive development and function a substantial number of small entities 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive in the rat. Fund. Appl. Toxicol. 12(1): and concluded that, as a general matter, Order 13175, requires EPA to develop 92–108. these actions do not impose a significant an accountable process to ensure 4. Khera, K.S., C. Whalen, and G. economic impact on a substantial ‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal Trivett. 1978. Teratogenicity studies on number of small entities. This analysis officials in the development of linuron, malathion, and methoxychlor was published on December 17, 1997 regulatory policies that have tribal in rats. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 45(2): (62 FR 66020), and was provided to the implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal 435–444. Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small implications’’ is defined in the 5. Kupfer, D. and W.H. Bulger. 1987. Business Administration. Taking into Executive Order to include regulations Metabolic activation of pesticides with account this analysis, and available that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on proestrogenic activity. Fed. Proc. 46(5): information concerning the pesticides one or more Indian tribes, on the 1864–1869. listed in this proposed rule, I certify that relationship between the Federal 6. Ware, G.W. 1982. Fundamentals of this action will not have a significant government and the Indian tribes, or on Pesticides, Thompson Publications. economic impact on a substantial the distribution of power and number of small entities. Specifically, as responsibilities between the Federal V. Regulatory Assessment per the 1997 notice, EPA has reviewed government and Indian tribes.’’ This Requirements its available data on imports and foreign proposed rule will not have substantial In this proposed rule, EPA is pesticide usage and concludes that there direct effects on tribal governments, on proposing to revoke specific tolerances is a reasonable international supply of the relationship between the Federal established under FFDCA section 408. food not treated with canceled government and Indian tribes, or on the The Office of Management and Budget pesticides. Furthermore, for the distribution of power and (OMB) has exempted this type of action pesticides named in this proposed rule, responsibilities between the Federal (i.e., a tolerance revocation for which the Agency knows of no extraordinary government and Indian tribes, as extraordinary circumstances do not circumstances that exist as to the specified in Executive Order 13175. exist) from review under Executive present proposed revocations that Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not Order 12866, entitled Regulatory would change EPA’s previous analysis. apply to this proposed rule. Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, Any comments about the Agency’s List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 October 4, 1993). Because this proposed determination should be submitted to rule has been exempted from review EPA along with comments on the Environmental protection, under Executive Order 12866 due to its proposal, and will be addressed prior to Administrative practice and procedure, lack of significance, this proposed rule issuing a final rule. In addition, the Agricultural commodities, Pesticides is not subject to Executive Order 13211, Agency has determined that this action and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping Actions Concerning Regulations That will not have a substantial direct effect requirements. Significantly Affect Energy Supply, on States, on the relationship between Dated: March 27, 2002. Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May the national government and the States, Marcia E. Mulkey, 22, 2001). This proposed rule does not or on the distribution of power and Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. contain any information collections responsibilities among the various subject to OMB approval under the levels of government, as specified in Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 Executive Order 13132, entitled part 180 be amended as follows: Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any PART 180—[AMENDED] enforceable duty or contain any 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires unfunded mandate as described under EPA to develop an accountable process 1. The authority citation for part 180 Title II of the Unfunded Mandates to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input continues to read as follows: Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public by State and local officials in the Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346(a) and Law 104–4). Nor does it require any development of regulatory policies that 371. special considerations as required by have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal that have federalism implications’’ is § 180.120 [Removed] Actions to Address Environmental defined in the Executive Order to 2. Section 180.120 is removed. Justice in Minority Populations and include regulations that have Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, [FR Doc. 02–8155 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] February 16, 1994); or OMB review or on the relationship between the national BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
VerDate 11
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE accessible via the Internet at http:// longer reliable. Therefore, the MFMC www.nero.nmfs.gov. could not develop recommendations for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Written comments regarding the alternative management measures. The Administration approved collection-of-information MFMC noted that updated resource requirements should be sent to the survey indices indicated that stock 50 CFR Part 648 Regional Administrator and to the abundance could have increas ed in the Office of Information and Regulatory [Docket No. 020329075–2075–01; I.D. Northern Fishery Management Area 031902E] Affairs, Office of Management and (NFMA) and stabilized in the SFMA. Budget, Washington, DC 20503 (Attn: The Councils considered this RIN 0648–AP11 NOAA Desk Officer). information and the results of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: updated stock assessment released in Fisheries of the Northeastern United Allison Ferreira, Fishery Management January 2002 (SAW 34). SAW 34 States; Monkfish Fishery; Framework Specialist, (978) 281-9103, fax (978) investigated several methods for Adjustment 1 281–9135, e-mail assessing stock status and provided AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries [email protected]. suggestions for improved biological reference points based on yield per Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The recruit analyses. Based on the results of Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), monkfish fishery is jointly managed by the current and previous assessments, Commerce. the New England Fishery Management an F threshold (F ) of F =0.2 was ACTION: Proposed rule; request for Council (NEFMC) and the Mid-Atlantic threshold max recommended by the Stock Assessment comments. Fishery Management Council Review Committee (SARC) for defining (MAFMC)(Councils), with the NEFMC overfishing. SUMMARY: NMFS proposes management having the administrative lead. The measures contained in Framework The assessment produced a range of intent of the management program fishing mortality estimates for calendar Adjustment 1 to the Monkfish Fishery established by the monkfish FMP is to Management Plan (FMP). These year 2000, which varied depending on eliminate overfishing by May 2002 and the method used for calculating F and measures would delay for 1 year the rebuild the stock by 2009. In order to default management measure contained on the assumptions used regarding tow ensure the elimination of overfishing by distance and relative net efficiency in in the FMP for the fishing year May, May 2002, current regulations specify 2002– April, 2003 (Year 4), and the industry-based trawl survey. The F that restrictive measures become estimates produced were between 0.10 establish management area total effective for Year 4 of the management allowable catch (TAC) targets for Year 4 and 0.38, with 61 percent of the F program (May 1, 2002 - April 30, 2003) estimates from the cooperative survey at the level of monkfish landings in Year unless a 3-year review of the stock 2. The framework would also adjust the less than or equal to the recommended status indicates that these restrictive Fmax=0.20. These F estimates included monkfish trip limits in the Southern measures are not necessary. The Year 4 Fishery Management Area (SFMA) to only 6 months of management default measures would eliminate the restrictions, implemented for Year 2 of achieve the proposed TAC while directed monkfish fishery by allocating considering the effect of a Federal court the FMP (effective May 1, 2000). The zero monkfish days-at-sea (DAS) and by management restrictions consisted of order vacating differential gear-based allowing only incidental landings of trip limits for trawl and gillnet vessels. the establishment of monkfish DAS, trip monkfish. Instead of the default limits, and a minimum fish size. During This proposed rule would also correct measures, this proposed rule, if and clarify the regulatory language 1998 and 1999, approximately one-third adopted, would implement the of the annual landings came from related to the monkfish area declaration following measures: (1) A 1-year delay procedures to make the procedures January - April. Thus, roughly, one-third of the default management measures of annual effort was likely expended in consistent with the intent of the FMP. contained in the FMP for the fishing 2000 before trip limits were DATES: Public comments must be year May, 2002 to April, 2003 (Year 4); implemented on May 1. This suggests received on or before April 19, 2002. (2) a revision of management area target that, even without further restrictions, F ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed TACs for Year 4 to be equivalent to the estimates for calendar year 2001 will be rule should be sent to Patricia A. level of landings in Year 2; and (3) an lower than the F for calendar year 2000, Kurkul, Regional Administrator, adjustment of trawl and non-trawl trip since management restrictions were in Northeast Region, NMFS, One limits in the SFMA to achieve the TACs, force for all of 2001. Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA while considering the impacts of a Given the proximity of F estimates for 01930–2298. Mark the outside of the Federal court order vacating differential calendar year 2000 to F=0.20, envelope ‘‘Comments on Monkfish gear-based trip limits for trawl and preliminary data from the NMFS’ fall Framework 1.’’ Comments may also be gillnet vessels. trawl survey for 2001 further support submitted via facsimile (fax) to 978– The Monkfish Monitoring Committee the conclusion that the proposed 281–9135. Comments will not be (MFMC) of the NEFMC, the NEFMC, measures will end overfishing. These accepted if submitted via e-mail or the and the MAFMC evaluated biological data, which are still preliminary, show Internet. reference points and the effectiveness of positive results for the stock in both Copies of Framework Adjustment 1 to management measures to stop management areas. After considering the Monkfish FMP, including the overfishing and to allow for rebuilding the information presented above, NMFS Environmental Assessment (EA), by 2009. This review relied on has determined that the proposed Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and information from the 31st Stock measures are consistent with the FMP Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Assessment Workshop (SAW 31, June objectives of ending overfishing in 2002 (IRFA) are available upon request from 2001) and on landings and stock survey and of rebuilding the monkfish stock by Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New information. The MFMC noted that 2009. England Fishery Management Council, SAW 31 determined that the fishing The Councils have also started to 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, mortality rate (F) reference points on develop Amendment 2 to the FMP to MA 01950. The EA/RIR/IRFA are also which the default TACs are based are no incorporate the results of SAW 34 in
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 16080 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules
developing revisions to the management multispecies, scallop, or monkfish DAS vessels holding limited access monkfish program, including the rebuilding plan in the NFMA. permits in a Confirmation of Permit and the overfishing definition. The History. Approximately 160 of these Classification Councils intend to implement vessels declared their intention to fish Amendment 2 by May 1, 2003 (Year 5). This final rule has been determined to in the NFMA for at least 30 days during be not significant for purposes of the 2001 fishing year (May 1, 2001, to Management Measures Executive Order 12866. April 30, 2002), thereby fishing under Optimum yield (OY) for Year 4 would The Council and NMFS prepared an the less restrictive management be specified at 19,595 metric tons (mt), IRFA that describes the economic measures of the NFMA. with TACs for the NFMA and SFMA set impact this proposed rule, if adopted, The preferred alternative would result at 11,674 mt and 7,921 mt, respectively. would have on small entities. A in loss of income from fishing year 2000 The analysis in Framework 1 description of the action, the reason for levels for several vessel types. However, determined that these TACs are being considered, and the legal basis for these losses are lower than the losses consistent with the fishing mortality this action are contained at the that would result from implementation threshold for ending overfishing of beginning of the preamble and in the of either the non-preferred or no action F=0.2, recommended by SAW 34. SUMMARY section of the preamble. alternative. Under the preferred This action does not contain any Framework 1 would also adjust the alternative, approximately 10 percent of additional collection-of-information, vessels less than 50 ft (15.24 m) in monkfish trip limits in the SFMA as reporting or recordkeeping needed to achieve the TACs while length would experience a 3.4-percent requirements. It will not duplicate, or greater reduction in income as a considering the effect of a Federal court overlap, or conflict with any other order issued on Feburary 15, 2002, in result of the proposed measures. Federal rules. A summary of the However, 10 percent of these vessels the case of Hall et al. v. Evans et al.(C.A. analysis follows: would experience a 12.4-percent or No. 99–5491 (D.R.I.), pursuant to an The IRFA analysis examined the greater reduction in income under the initial court decision issued on August economic impacts of three sets of non-preferred alternative and a 54.6- 14, 2001, vacating differential gear- management alternatives for Year 4 of percent or greater loss in income under based trip limits for trawl and gillnet the FMP: Preferred and non-preferred the ‘‘no action’’ alternative. The income vessels. This framework would allocate, alternatives for OY and management of vessels in other size categories would as in Years 2 and 3, 40 monkfish DAS area TACs, and a ‘‘no action’’ either not be affected by implementation to limited access permit holders for Year alternative. The preferred alternative of the preferred alternative, or would be 4, with no monkfish trip limit while consists of the measures outlined in this reduced by less than 1 percent. fishing on a monkfish or multispecies proposed rule. These measures consist Conversely, 10 percent of vessels greater DAS in the NFMA, and a trip limit of of a delay in the Year 4 default than or equal to 50 ft (15.24 m) in length 550 lb (249 kg) (tail weight, per DAS) for management measures for 1 year and of would experience some income loss permit categories A and C, or 450 lb the establishment of an OY of 19,595 mt under the non-preferred and ‘‘no (204 kg) (tail weight, per DAS) for for Year 4, with management area TACs action’’ alternatives. For example, permit categories B and D while fishing of 11,674 mt and 7,921 mt for the NFMA vessels between 50 and 70 feet (21.34 m) on a monkfish DAS in the SFMA. The and SFMA, respectively. This OY is in length would experience an income incidental catch limits, which vary by equivalent to the level of landings loss of 1.5 percent or greater under the permit category and fishing area, would generated during Year 2 of the non-preferred alternative, and a 10.2- continue at current levels for 1 rebuilding program. percent or greater loss in income under additional year. The non-preferred alternative would the ‘‘no action’’ alternative. Technical Correction establish an OY of 11,697 mt for Year Vessels that fish for monkfish but that 4, with management area TACs of 5,673 are not eligible for limited access This proposed rule would also make mt and 6,024 mt for the NFMA and the permits to fish for Northeast a technical correction to the regulatory SFMA, respectively. This OY is multispecies or sea scallops (category A language at § 648.94(f) citing area equivalent to the OY specified for Years and B permits) would be the vessels declaration procedures. This would 2 and 3 of the rebuilding plan for most severely impacted by the no action make the regulatory language consistent monkfish. In addition, the preferred and alternative. Under this alternative, 10 with the FMP, which stated that under non-preferred alternatives would adjust percent of these vessels would lose 100 certain circumstances vessels with the directed monkfish trip limits in the percent of their net income from fishing. multispecies, scallop, and monkfish SFMA to achieve corresponding TAC However, 10 percent of vessels in these DAS permits would be required to for that area. The ‘‘no action’’ alternative categories would likely not be affected declare into the NFMA to fish. The considers the impacts associated with at all because their landings during the collection-of-information requirements default management measures. 2000 fishing year were at or below the for the FMP approved under the The category of entities likely to be incidental catch levels allowed under Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) also affected by this action are the limited the ‘‘no action’’ alternative. Impacts to contained references to the access monkfish permit holders, which these vessels would be substantially less multispecies, scallop and monkfish DAS are virtually all small entities, primarily under either the preferred or non- permit vessels. When the regulations trawl and gillnet vessels fishing in the preferred alternatives. Under the implementing the FMP were published, SFMA. Thus, analysis of the impacts of preferred alternative, 10 percent of these NMFS inadvertently only referenced this proposed rule necessarily includes vessels would experience no income vessels with monkfish DAS permits, impacts on all small entities affected. loss, but 50 percent would experience rather than also including vessels with The preferred alternative affects only a an income loss of 3.1 percent or greater. multispecies and scallop permits. subset of those entities, primarily trawl Under the non-preferred alternative, 10 Therefore, this action proposes to and gillnet vessels fishing in the SFMA. percent of these vessels would correct the current regulatory language As of March 13, 2002, there were 704 experience no income loss, but 50 at § 648.94(f) to include all vessels vessels holding active limited access percent would experience an income fishing for monkfish under a monkfish permits and an additional 34 loss of 9.9 percent or greater.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Proposed Rules 16081
Under any of the three alternatives, estimate, or any other aspect of this data vessels fishing under the monkfish DAS vessels that hold limited access permits collection, including suggestions for program in the SFMA may land up to for either multispecies or scallops in reducing the burden, to NMFS (see 550 lb (249 kg) tail-weight or 1,826 lb addition to monkfish (category C and D) ADDRESSES) and to OMB at the Office of (828 kg) whole weight of monkfish per would be the least affected of all vessels Information and Regulatory Affairs, DAS (or any prorated combination of holding limited access monkfish Office of Management and Budget, tail-weight and whole weight based on permits. Under the preferred alternative, Washington DC 20503 (Attention: the conversion factor). category C vessels have a higher NOAA Desk Officer). (ii) Category B and D vessels. Category possession limit than category D vessels. B and D vessels fishing under the List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648 Ten percent of category C vessels would monkfish DAS program in the SFMA experience a 0.8–percent or greater Fisheries, Fishing, reporting and may land up to 450 lb (204 kg) tail- reduction in income, and 10 percent of recordkeeping requirements. weight or 1,494 lb (678 kg) whole category D vessels would experience a March 29, 2002. weight of monkfish per DAS (or any 2.9–percent or greater reduction in Rebecca Lent, prorated combination of tail-weight and income. Under the non-preferred Deputy Assistant Administrator for whole weight based on the conversion alternative, category C vessels also have Regulatory Programs, National Marine factor). a higher trip limit than category D Fisheries Service. (iii) Administration of landing limits. vessels. Category C vessels would A vessel owner or operator may not For the reasons set out in the experience a 3.7–percent or greater loss exceed the monkfish trip limits as preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is proposed in income, while category D vessels specified in paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and to be amended as follows: would experience a 5.9–percent or (iii) of this section per monkfish DAS greater loss in income. Finally, the ‘‘no PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE fished, or any part of a monkfish DAS action’’ alternative would result in 10 NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES fished. percent of category C vessels having a (2) [Reserved] 25.8–percent loss in income, while 1. The authority citation for part 648 (3) Category C and D vessels fishing category D vessels would experience a continues to read as follows: during a multispecies DAS prior to May 43.3–percent loss in income. 1, 2003— * * * Geographically, vessels homeported Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 2. In § 648.92, paragraph (b)(1) is * * * * * in New Jersey and Delaware (combined) (4) Category C and D vessels fishing would be the vessels most affected revised to read as follows: during a multispecies DAS from May 1, under all three alternatives. Under the § 648.92 Effort-control program for 2003, and thereafter— * * * ‘‘no action’’ alternative, 10 percent of monkfish limited access vessels. these vessels would experience a 72– * * * * * percent or greater loss in income, while * * * * * (5) Category C and D vessels fishing 10 percent of these vessels would (b) * * * under the scallop DAS program prior to experience a 12.5–percent or greater loss (1) Limited access monkfish permit May 1, 2003. * * * in income under the non-preferred holders. For fishing year 2002, all * * * * * alternative. Under the preferred limited access monkfish permit holders (6) Category C and D vessels fishing alternative, 10 percent of the vessels shall be allocated 40 monkfish DAS. under the scallop DAS program from homeported in New Jersey and Multispecies and scallop limited access May 1, 2003, and thereafter.* * * permit holders who also qualify for a Delaware would experience only a 2.1– * * * * * limited access monkfish permit shall be percent or greater loss in income. (7) Category C and D scallop vessels allocated up to 40 monkfish DAS, A copy of this analysis is available declared into the monkfish DAS depending on whether they have from the Council (see ADDRESSES). program without a dredge on board. sufficient multispecies and/or scallop Notwithstanding any other provision Category C and D vessels that have DAS to use concurrently with their of the law, no person is required to declared into the monkfish DAS monkfish DAS, as required by paragraph respond to, nor shall any person be program and that do not fish with or (b)(2) of this section. For fishing years subject to a penalty for failure to comply have on board a dredge are subject to 2003 and thereafter, no monkfish DAS with, a collection of information subject the same possession limits as specified will be allocated to any limited access to the requirements of the Paperwork at paragraph (b)(1) of this section. * * * monkfish permit holder. Reduction Act (PRA), unless that (c) * * * collection of information displays a * * * * * (2) * * * currently valid OMB control number. 3. In § 648.94, revise paragraph (b)(1); (i) Prior to May 1, 2003.* * * This action makes a technical remove and reserve paragraph (b)(2); (ii) From May 1, 2003, and correction to the regulatory language and revise the introductory paragraph thereafter.* * * referencing area declaration procedures. headings of (b)(3), (b)(4), (b)(5), and * * * * * This collection-of-information (b)(6); the first sentence of paragraph requirement that is subject to the PRA (f) Area declaration. In order for a (b)(7), the introductory paragraph vessel fishing under a multispecies, has been approved by OMB under headings of (c)(2)(i) and (ii), and the first control number 0648–0202. Public scallop, or monkfish DAS to fish for sentence of paragraph (f) to read as monkfish under the less restrictive reporting burden for this collection of follows: information is estimated to average 3 management measures of the NFMA, minutes per response, including the § 648.94 Monkfish possession and landing such vessel must declare into, and fish time for reviewing instructions, restrictions. for monkfish exclusively in, the NFMA searching existing data sources, * * * * * for a period of not less than 30 days. * gathering and maintaining the data (b) * * * * * needed, and completing and reviewing (1) Vessels fishing under the monkfish * * * * * the collection of information. Send DAS program in the SFMA. (i) Category [FR Doc. 02–8076 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] comments regarding this burden A and C vessels. Category A and C BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
VerDate Mar<13>2002 10:14 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04APP1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APP1 16082
Notices Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 65
Thursday, April 4, 2002
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER ‘‘ATTN: Forest Plan Revision’’ in the 5. Monitoring and evaluation contains documents other than rules or subject line. requirements needed to gauge how well proposed rules that are applicable to the the plan is being implemented. public. Notices of hearings and investigations, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Gianniny, Forest Planner; Ken Arbogast, 6. Recommendations to Congress, if committee meetings, agency decisions and any (such as Wilderness or Wild and rulings, delegations of authority, filing of Forest Public Affairs Officer; Rebecca Ewing, Forest Biologist; or Connie Scenic River designation) petitions and applications and agency The scope of this Revision is limited statements of organization and functions are Roberts, Planning Management to changing only those portions of the examples of documents appearing in this Assistant; at the address listed in the current Forest Plan that need revision, section. previous section, or by calling 740–753– update, or correction. We propose to 0101; fax number 740–753–0118; or narrow the scope of revising the Forest TDD 800–877–8339. Further DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Plan by focusing on topics identified as information can also be obtained by being most critically in need of change. sending electronic mail to: Forest Service _ _ The six decisions listed above will be ‘‘r9 wayne [email protected]’’, or by revisited only in how they apply to the Wayne National Forest; Revised Land accessing the forest Web page at revision topics that are identified. and Resource Management Plan; www.fs.fed.us/r9/wayne. Athens, Gallia, Hocking, Jackson, Responsible Official: The Responsible Purpose and Need for Action Lawrence, Monroe, Morgan, Noble, Official for this action is Donald L. There are three compelling reasons to Perry, Scioto, Vinton and Washington Meyer, Acting Regional Forester, revise the 1988 Forest Plan: (1) Nearly Counties, OH Eastern Region, 310 W. Wisconsin Ave., 15 years have passed since the Regional Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203. Forester approved the original Forest AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Plan for the Wayne National Forest and ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Regional Forester for the Eastern Region national forests must revise the forest environmental impact statement (EIS). gives notice of the agency’s intent to plan at least every 15 years according to SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service prepare an EIS to revise the Wayne requirements of the National Forest intends to prepare an environmental National Forest Plan pursuant to 16 Management Act (U.S.C. 1604[f][5]); (2) impact statement for revising the Wayne U.S.C. 1604(f)(5) and USDA Forest agency goals and objectives, along with National Forest Land and Resource Service National Forest System Land other national guidance for strategic Management Plan (Forest Plan). The and Resource Management Planning plans and programs, have changed more revised Forest Plan will replace the regulations. The Regional Forester than can effectively be covered by current Forest Plan, which the Regional approved the original Wayne National additional forest plan amendments and Forester approved January 4, 1988, and Forest Plan in January 1988. This plan (3) incorporate new information and has been amended 12 times. The 1988 guides the overall management of the address changed conditions. Forest Plan as amended will remain in Wayne National Forest. Background—The Setting effect until this revision effort is Forest Plan Decisions The Wayne National Forest forms the completed. This notice identifies the core of the hill country of southeastern We make six primary decisions in the topics that will help focus our revision Ohio, the most heavily forested part of Forest Plan: effort, lists possible changes to the the state. Just 200 years ago, this region Forest Plan, displays the estimated dates 1. Forest-wide multiple-use goals and of the Appalachian plateau was viewed for filing the Draft EIS, provides objectives. Goals describe a desired by most Americans as part of a vast information concerning public condition to be achieved sometime in wilderness. Today many people still participation, and provides the names the future. Objectives are concise, time- view the Wayne as a remnant of the and addresses of the responsible agency specific statements of measurable forest primeval. But the impacts of official and the individuals who can planned results that respond to the historic industry and agricultural provide additional information. goals. practices have left indelible marks upon DATES: We need to receive your 2. Forest-wide management the land. Virtually all of the forest that comments on this Notice of Intent in requirements (standards and covered Ohio when American settlers writing within 90 days after this Notice guidelines.) These are limitations on arrived was cut to make way for farms is published in the Federal Register. management activities, or advisable and to fuel both home and industry. The Draft EIS and draft revised Forest courses of action that apply across the Mining for iron ore, limestone, coal and Plan are expected to be available for entire forest. clay scarred hillsides and polluted public review by December 2004. The 3. Management area direction many streams. As factories closed and Final EIS and revised Forest Plan are applying to future activities in each farms failed in the 1930s, the Forest expected to be completed by December management area. This is the desired Service began to acquire and restore 2005. future condition specified for certain what were once dubbed ‘‘the lands that ADDRESSES: Send written comments to: portions of the forest, and the nobody wanted.’’ After nearly 70 years, NOI–FP Revision, Wayne National accompanying standards and guidelines the innate resilience of the hill country Forest, 13700 US Highway 33, to help achieve that condition. forest, enhanced by the work of the Nelsonville, OH 45764, or direct 4. Lands suited and not suited for Forest Service and countless partners, electronic mail to: resource use and production (timber has created a new forest that many ‘‘[email protected]’’, and management, grazing, etc.) people now value for its opportunities:
VerDate 11
to experience nature; to enjoy a variety ownership and reduce the existing that apply to National Forest System of recreation; to explore the unique fragmented ownership pattern; lands. The Forest Plan will make no heritage of Southeast Ohio, once a major • Manage National Forest boundaries to decisions regarding management or use link in the Underground Railroad; and reduce trespass and encroachments. of privately owned lands or reserved to employ the Forest’s resources for the 5. Minerals Resource Management: and outstanding mineral estates. Topics region’s economic development. • Minimize adverse environmental related to implementing projects or Today, most of Ohio is dominated by impacts to Federal resources when enforcing regulations are also beyond rich farmland, industrial cities, private mineral rights are developed; the scope of what can be decided in a sprawling suburbs and busy highways; • Identify areas appropriate for leasing forest plan. and ranks 7th among states in of federally held oil and gas rights The management guidelines related to population and 47th in public lands per consistent with national direction. Threatened and Endangered species are capita. This scarcity of public lands not included as a revision topic because 6. Roadless Area Inventory and creates intense competing demands for the Forest is currently amending the Evaluation; Wilderness the Wayne’s limited landbase and existing Forest Plan based on formal Recommendation; and Wild and Scenic resources. The challenge for those who consultation with the USDI Fish and choose to participate in the revision of River Recommendations: • Wildlife Service. All information will be the Forest Plan is to provide information Protect the wilderness characteristics brought forward into the revised Forest and ideas that will help the Forest of those areas identified for potential Plan and does not need to be duplicated Service balance those competing wilderness designation; • during the revision process. The demands in a way that will continue to Protect rivers eligible for inclusion in alternatives in the Final EIS will be provide for multiple uses of the Wayne the national Wild and Scenic Rivers analyzed for their effects on Threatened National Forest. Given the significant system. and Endangered species. impact that past practices by the Based on these Revision Topics and Public comments received on topics region’s agriculture and industries have action items, the Forest planning team that will not be addressed in the revised had upon the land, the Forest Plan is gathering information for an analysis Forest Plan will be forwarded to the management direction will continue to of current and projected uses, demand, managers responsible for that topic area. place special priority upon the and capabilities of the Forest. Data The comments will be considered as restoration of the forest, the lands, the gathering/analyses that are either managers develop information and watersheds and the ecosystem. underway or planned include a proposals related to those topics. Such recreation feasibility study, a social Proposed Action proposals may result in future plan assessment, evaluation of potential amendments, changes in The revision of the Wayne Forest Plan roadless areas, evaluation of rivers for implementation, changes in program will focus on management direction designation as Wild, Scenic or emphasis, or various other means of identified as needing change. The Recreation status, and species viability addressing the concerns related to a following Revision Topics were evaluations. Another analysis will particular topic. Implementation of identified through public comment, compare historical and current proposals will be addressed as budget through monitoring and evaluation, and ecological conditions within the Forest priorities allow. through experience with and across the broader landscape of implementation of the Forest Plan since southeastern Ohio. Collectively this Possible Alternatives 1988: information and analysis will contribute We will consider a range of 1. Watershed Health: to our Analysis of the Management alternatives to the proposed action • Protect and restore watershed health, Situation. The studies, and related when revising the Forest Plan. including restoration of abandoned references compiled by the planning Alternatives will be developed to mine lands; team, will be made available for public • address different options to resolve Protect riparian areas. review when completed. issues raised about the proposed action, 2. Ecosystem Restoration: In addition to the Revision Topics, we and the Revision Topics and proposals • Restore the mixed oak ecosystem to a propose to revise the Forest Plan to: listed above, and to fulfill the purpose sustainable level; • Make minor changes throughout the and need described earlier in this • Use vegetative management Forest Plan for new or updated document. Alternatives will provide techniques to move toward the information; different ways to address and respond to desired future condition; • Update the monitoring and evaluation issues identified during the scoping • Control non-native invasive species; strategy in the current Forest Plan. process. A ‘‘No Action’’ alternative is • Provide a range of ecological Additional detail on the Revision required and will be considered. For conditions to maintain diversity of Topics is available on request. You may this analysis, the No Action alternative native plants and animals. request the additional information by: means that management would continue 3. Recreation Management: accessing the Forest Web page at under the existing Forest Plan as • Provide a visually pleasing landscape; www.fs.fed.us/r9/wayne by writing or e- amended. • Maintain the range of recreation mailing to the address listed in this Decision Framework opportunities currently available; notice; or by calling the phone number • Provide trails for motorized and non- listed above. You are encouraged to The Responsible Official will decide motorized users; on the management direction for the • review this additional documentation Manage pre-historic and historic before commenting on the Notice of Wayne National Forest. The Responsible cultural resources, including Intent. Official’s choices will include: preservation of sites associated with 1. The Proposed Action described in the Underground Railroad. Topics Not Addressed in This Revision this Notice of Intent; 4. Land Ownership: Forest plan decisions do not change 2. The No Action Alternative which • Acquire and exchange land to laws, regulations or rights. The revised would continue management under the increase contiguous Federal Forest Plan will only make decisions current Forest Plan as amended; and
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16084 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
3. Alternatives developed during the formal comment period, public describe ways that individuals can revision process to address issues raised meetings, written comments, Web site respond to this Notice of Intent; and (4) about the Proposed Action. and e-mail. The Forest Service will host invite comments from the public on this a series of public meetings to (1) Inviting Public Participation proposal for revising the Forest Plan. establish multiple opportunities for the The table below is the schedule of After the publication of this Notice of public to generate ideas, concerns, and initial meetings that will be held during Intent, we will provide opportunities for alternatives, (2) present and clarify the 90-day comment period. public involvement including: 90-day proposed changes to the Forest Plan; (3)
Community Date Time Location
Canton, Ohio ...... 6/25/02 5–9 p.m ...... Four Points Sheraton, 4375 Metro Circle NW., (330) 494–7129. Cincinnati, Ohio ...... 6/04/02 5–9 p.m ...... Clarion Hotel & Suites, 5901 Pfeiffer Rd., (513) 793– 4500. Cleveland area—Independence, Ohio ...... 6/24/02 5–9 p.m ...... Holiday Inn, 6001 Rockside Rd., (216) 524–8050. Columbus area—Dublin, Ohio ...... 6/10/02 5–9 p.m ...... Embassy Suites Hotel, 5100 Upper Metro Pl., (614) 790–9000. Dayton area—Fairborn, Ohio ...... 6/03/02 5–9 p.m ...... Wright State Univ., Student Union Bldg., 3640 Colonel Glenn, (937) 775–5512. Graysville, Ohio ...... 6/22/02 1–5 p.m ...... Community Center, 38851 State Rt. 26, (740) 934– 2245. Huntington, West Virginia ...... 6/05/02 5–9 p.m ...... Radisson Hotel, 1001 Third Avenue, (304) 525–1001. Logan, Ohio ...... 6/13/02 5–9 p.m ...... Logan-Hocking Middle, 1 Middle School Drive, (740) 385–8764. Rio Grande, Ohio ...... 6/29/02 1–5 p.m ...... U. of Rio Grande, Fine Arts Center F23, (740) 245– 7404. Zanesville, Ohio ...... 6/26/02 5–9 p.m ...... Holiday Inn, 4645 East Pike, (740) 453–0771.
From mid-2002 through mid-2004, we confidentiality may be granted in only Early Notice of Importance of Public will validate issues and develop very limited circumstances, such as to Participation in Subsequent alternatives. We will provide many protect trade secrets. Environmental Review types of public involvement in support The Forest Service will inform the A Draft EIS will be prepared for of alternative development, including: requester of the agency’s decision comment. The comment period on the Public workshops, collaborative regarding the request for confidentiality draft environmental impact statement meetings, written comments, website, and where the requester is denied, the will be 90 days from the date the and e-mail. agency will return the submission and Environmental Protection Agency Late in the year 2004 we will release notify the requester that the comments publishes the Notice of Availability in our proposed revised Forest Plan and a may be resubmitted with or without the Federal Register. draft environmental impact statement. name and address within 90 days. The Forest Service believes, at this We will again provide many types of early stage, it is important to give public involvement including 90-day Comment Requested reviewers notice of several court rulings formal comment period, public related to public participation in the This Notice of Intent initiates the meetings, and written comments. environmental review process. First, scoping process which assists the Forest During most of 2005 we will address reviewers of draft environmental impact Service in the development of the the public comment and revise the Draft statements must structure their environmental impact statement. EIS based on those comments and participation in the environmental Comments will be most helpful if they further analysis. In late 2005, we will review of the proposal so that it is are written and are specific in nature, release the decision, final revised Forest meaningful and alerts an agency to the stating not only the area of concern but Plan, Final EIS, and record of decision. reviewer’s position and contentions. We will provide informational meetings also the reason for the concern. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. to explain these documents and Proposed New Planning Regulations NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978). Also, decision on the final Forest Plan. environmental objections that could be The Department of Agriculture raised at the draft environmental impact Availability of Public Comment published new planning regulations in statement stage but that are not raised Comments received in response to November of 2000. Concerns regarding until after completion of the final this solicitation, including names and the ability to implement these environmental impact statement may be addresses of those who comment, will regulations prompted a review with waived or dismissed by the courts. City be considered part of the public record probable revision of these regulations. of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, on this proposed action and will be On May 10, 2001, Secretary Veneman 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin available for public inspection. signed an interim final rule allowing Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR forest plan amendments or revisions 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of 1.27(d), any persons may request the initiated before May 9, 2002, to proceed these court rulings, it is very important agency to withhold a submission from either under the new planning rule or that those interested in this proposed the public record by showing how the under the 1982 planning regulations. action participate by the close of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) The Wayne National Forest revision comment period for the draft permits such confidentiality. Persons process will start under the 1982 environmental impact statement so that requesting such confidentiality should planning regulations, pending future substantive comments and objections be aware that, under FOIA, direction in revised regulations. are made available to the Forest Service
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16085
at a time when it can meaningfully provide advice and recommendations Colorado State Office consider them and respond to them in consistent with the purposes of the Act. 655 Parfet Street, Room E100, Lakewood, CO the final environmental impact 80215, 303–236–2801, Leroy Cruz George P. Matejko, statement. Delaware State Office\*\ Forest Supervisor, Salmon—Challis National To assist the Forest Service in Forest, Designated Federal Official. 4607 S. DuPont Highway, P.O. Box 400, identifying and considering issues and [FR Doc. 02–8178 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Camden, DE 19934–9998, 302–697–4300, James E. Waters concerns on the proposed action, BILLING CODE 3410–11–M comments on the draft environmental Florida State Office\**\ impact statement should be as specific 4440 N.W. 25th Place, P.O. Box 147010, as possible. It is also helpful if DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Gainesville, FL 32614–7010, 352–338– comments refer to specific pages or 3400, Glenn W. Walden chapters of the draft statement. Rural Housing Service Georgia State Office Comments may also address the Announcement of Funding To Develop Stephens Federal Building, 355 E. Hancock adequacy of the draft environmental Avenue, Athens, GA 30601–2768, 706– impact statement or the merits of the Essential Community Facilities in 546–2162, Jerry Thomas alternatives formulated and discussed in Rural Communities for Eligible Tribal Colleges Listed as 1994 Land Grant Hawaii State Office the statement. Reviewers may wish to Room 311, Federal Building, 154 refer to the Council of Environmental Institutions That Have Met the Criteria Under the Equity in Education Land- Waianuenue Avenue, Hilo, HI 96720, 808– Quality Regulations (http:// 933–8380, Thao Khamoui Grant Status Act ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/nepanet.htm) for Idaho State Office implementing the procedural provision AGENCY: Rural Housing Service, USDA. 9173 W. Barnes Drive, Suite A1, Boise, ID of the National Environmental Policy ACTION: Notice. 83709, 208–378–5600, Dan Fraser Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. SUMMARY: The Rural Housing Service Illinois State Office (RHS) announces the availability of $4 2118 West Park Court, Suite A, Champaign, (Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; million in national competitive grant IL 61821, 217–403–6200, Gerald Townsend Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section funds to be administered in accordance Indiana State Office 21) with this Notice, 7 U.S.C. 1926(a)(19), 5975 Lakeside Boulevard, Indianapolis, IN Dated: March 28, 2002. and the Community Facilities grant 46278, 317–290–3100, Gregg Delp Donald L. Meyer, program (7 CFR part 3570, subpart B) for Iowa State Office Acting Regional Forester. tribal colleges to develop essential 873 Federal Building, 210 Walnut Street, Des [FR Doc. 02–8124 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] community facilities in rural Moines, IA 50309, 515–284–4663, Dorman BILLING CODE 3410–11–P communities. A. Otte DATES: Applications may be submitted Kansas State Office at any time until funds are exhausted. 1303 SW First American Place, Suite 100, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (See Allocation of Funds and Selection Topeka, KS 66604–0440, 785–271–2700, Process.) Gary Smith Forest Service ADDRESSES: Entities wishing to apply for Kentucky State Office assistance are encouraged to contact Suite 200, 771 Corporate Drive, Lexington, Central Idaho Resource Advisory their local USDA Rural Development Committee Meeting; Salmon-Challis KY 40503, 859–224–7300, Vernon C. State office for guidance on the intake Brown National Forest, Butte, Custer, and and processing of preapplications. A Lemhi Counties, ID Louisiana State Office listing of Rural Development State 3727 Government Street, Alexandria, LA offices, addresses, telephone numbers, AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 71302, 318–473–7920, Danny Magee and a person to contact follows: Maine State Office ACTION: Notice of meeting of the Note: Telephone numbers listed are not Resource Advisory Committee. 967 Illinois Avenue, Suite 4, P.O. Box 405, toll-free. Bangor, ME 04402–0405, 207–990–9106, Alabama State Office Alan Daigle SUMMARY: The Central Idaho Resource Massachusetts State Office\***\ Advisory Committee will meet at 2 p.m., Suite 601, Sterling Centre, 4121 Carmichael April 11, 2002 at the Custer County Road Montgomery, AL 36106–3683, 334– 451 West Street, Amherst, MA 01002, 413– Courthouse, Challis, Idaho. The 15- 279–3400, James B. Harris 253–4300, Daniel Beaudette member committee will be evaluating Alaska State Office Michigan State Office proposed projects and recommending 800 W. Evergreen, Suite 201, Palmer, AK 3001 Coolidge Road, Suite 200, East Lansing, projects to the Salmon—Challis 99645–6539, 907–761–7705, Dean Stewart MI 48823, 517–324–5100, Philip H. Wolak National Forest. The committee will Arizona State Office Minnesota State Office also discuss individual project Phoenix Corporate Center, 3003 North 410 AgriBank Building, 375 Jackson Street, proposals for 2002. The meeting is open Central Avenue, Suite 900, Phoenix, AZ St. Paul, MN 55101–1853, 651–602–7800, to the public and time will be scheduled 85012–2906, 602–280–8700, Leonard James Maras for public comments. Gradillas Mississippi State Office The Central Idaho Resource Advisory Arkansas State Office Federal Building, Suite 831, 100 W. Capitol, Committee was established by the 700 W. Capitol Avenue, Room 3416, Little Jackson, MS 39269, 601–965–4316, Secretary of Agriculture under Title II of Rock, AR 72201–3225, 501–301–3200, Darnella Smith-Murray the Secure Rural Schools and Jesse G. Sharp Missouri State Office Community Self-Determination Act of California State Office 601 Business Loop 70 West, Parkade Center, 2000 to work collaboratively with the 430 G Street, #4169, Davis, CA 95616–4169, Suite 235, Columbia, MO 65203, 573–876– Salmon-Challis National Forest to 530–792–5800, Janice Waddell 0976, D. Clark Thomas
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16086 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
Montana State Office Utah State Office Background Unit 1, Suite B, P.O. Box 850, 900 Wallace F. Bennett Federal Building, 125 S. Under the FY 2002 appropriation, Technology Boulevard, Bozeman, MT State Street, Rm. 4311, P.O. Box 11350, Congress appropriated $4 million for a 59715, 406–585–2580, Deborah Chorlton Salt Lake City, UT 84147–0350, 801–524– 4320, Bonnie Carrig Community Facilities grant program for Nebraska State Office tribal colleges, hereafter referred to as Federal Building, Room 152, 100 Centennial Vermont State Office**** the Tribal College Initiative. The eligible Mall N, Lincoln, NE 68508, 402–437–5551, City Center, 3rd Floor, 89 Main Street, tribal colleges are 1994 land-grant Denise Brosius-Meeks Montpelier, VT 05602, 802–828–1600, institutions that have met the criteria Rhonda Shippee Nevada State Office under the Equity in Education Land- 1390 South Curry Street, Carson City, NV Virginia State Office Grant Status Act of 1994. These funds 89703–9910, 775–887–1222, Mike E. Holm Culpeper Building, Suite 238, 1606 Santa are in addition to the Community New Jersey State Office Rosa Road, Richmond, VA 23229, 804– Facilities grant program’s regular 287–1550, Carrie Schmidt Tarnsfield Plaza, Suite 22, 790 WoodLane allocation of competitive grant funds. Washington State Office Road, Mt. Holly, NJ 08060, 609–265–3600, Additional Eligibility Requirements Michael P. Kelsey 1835 Black Lake Blvd. SW., Suite B, New Mexico State Office Olympia, WA 98512–5715, 360–704–7740, In addition to those requirements Sandi Boughton contained in 7 CFR part 3570, subpart 6200 Jefferson Street NE, Room 255, Albuquerque, NM 87109, 505–761–4950, West Virginia State Office B, applicants eligible to compete for Clyde F. Hudson Federal Building, 75 High Street, Room 320, tribal college funds for FY 2002 must be one of the land-grant institutions that New York State Office Morgantown, WV 26505–7500, 304–284– 4860, Dianne Crysler meet the criteria under the Equity in The Galleries of Syracuse, 441 S. Salina Wisconsin State Office Education Land-Grant Status Act of Street, Suite 357, Syracuse, NY 13202– 1994. 2541, 315–477–6400, Gail Giannotta 4949 Kirschling Court, Stevens Point, WI North Carolina State Office 54481, 715–345–7600, Mark Brodziski Allocation of Funds 4405 Bland Road, Suite 260, Raleigh, NC Wyoming State Office All Tribal College Initiative funds will 27609, 919–873–2000, Phyllis Godbold 100 East B, Federal Building, Room 1005, remain in the National Office reserve for North Dakota State Office P.O. Box 820, Casper, WY 82602, 307–261– funding consideration for FY 2002. 6300, Charles Huff Federal Building, Room 208, 220 East Rosser, Project selections will be on a national P.O. Box 1737, Bismarck, ND 58502–1737, * The Delaware State Office also competitive basis. There will be two 701–530–2037, Donald Warren administers the Maryland program. windows of opportunity to compete for ** The Florida State Office also Ohio State Office grant funding. It is anticipated, the first administers the Virgin Island program. 16 round of funding selections will be Federal Building, Room 507, 200 North High *** The Massachusetts State Office also Street, Columbus, OH 43215–2418, 614– administers the Rhode Island and made after May 10, 2002. The second 255–2400, David Douglas Connecticut programs. round will be held after August 23, 2002. Each application will be limited Oklahoma State Office **** The Vermont State Office also administers the New Hampshire program. to $200,000. 100 USDA, Suite 108, Stillwater, OK 74074– 2654, 405–742–1000, Rock W. Davis FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Selection Process Andrea Barnett, Community Programs, Oregon State Office RHS, USDA, STOP 0787, 1400 Once a determination has been made 101 SW Main, Suite 1410, Portland, OR Independence Ave., SW., Washington, by the State Office that an applicant is 97204–3222, 503–414–3300, Jerry W. 14 DC 20250–0787, Telephone (202) eligible, the preapplication is evaluated Sheridan 720–1490, Facsimile (202) 690–0471, E- competitively and points awarded as Pennsylvania State Office mail: [email protected]. specified in the project selection One Credit Union Place, Suite 330, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION priorities contained in 7 CFR part 3570, Harrisburg, PA 17110–2996, 717–237– subpart B. The State Director or 2299, Gary Rothrock Paperwork Reduction Act designee will then forward the request Puerto Rico State Office The reporting requirements contained to the National Office to compete for IBM Building, Suite 601, 654 Munos Rivera in this notice have been approved by the funding consideration. Projects will Avenue, Hato Rey, PR 00918–6106, 787– Office of Management and Budget then be rated, ranked, and selections 766–5095, Pedro Gomez (OMB) and have been assigned OMB made in order of priority. Each proposal South Carolina State Office control number 0575–0173 in will be judged on its own merit. Unless accordance with the Paperwork withdrawn by the applicant, projects Strom Thurmond Federal Building, 835 not selected for funding consideration Assembly Street, Room 1007, Columbia, SC Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 29102, 803–765–5163, Larry Floyd for the first round of funding selections Authorizing Legislation and will remain eligible to compete for the South Dakota State Office Regulations next round of funding. Federal Building, Room 210, 200 Fourth This program is authorized under To be considered for the first window, Street SW., Huron, SD 57350, 605–352– section 306(a) of the Consolidated Farm all preapplications along with 1100, Roger Hazuka and Rural Development Act. RHS will supporting documentation satisfactory Tennessee State Office administer these funds using the same to the Agency must be received by the Suite 300, 3322 West End Avenue, Nashville, regulations that govern its Community Rural Development State or designated TN 37203–1084, 615–783–1300, Keith Facilities grant program. Program field office by close of business May 3, Head administration, eligibility, processing, 2002. To be considered for the second Texas State Office and servicing requirements that govern window, all preapplications must be Federal Building, Suite 102, 101 South Main, the Community Facilities grant program received by the Rural Development Temple, TX 76501, 254–742–9700, Eugene may be found under 7 CFR part 3570, State or designated field office by close G. Pavlat subpart B. of business August 16, 2002.
VerDate 11
Notice of Invitation to Submit Complete CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER of China, 67 FR 11670 (March 15, 2002) Application INFORMATION: Les Jin, Press and (Amended Final Determination). In the Communications (202) 376–7700. Amended Final Determination, the All preapplications selected for Department amended the weight- Debra A. Carr, funding consideration will be notified average margins for Fuyao Glass by the State or field office by issuing Deputy General Counsel. Industry Group Company, Ltd. (‘‘FYG’’), Form AD–622, ‘‘Notice of [FR Doc. 02–8349 Filed 4–2–02; 3:31 pm] Xinyi Automotive Glass (Shenzhen) Co., Preapplication Review Action.’’ At that BILLING CODE 6335–01–M Ltd. (‘‘Xinyi’’), Shenzhen Benxun Auto- time, the proposed recipient will be Glass Co., Ltd. (‘‘Benxun’’), Changchun invited to submit a complete Pilkington Safety Glass Co., Ltd. application, along with instructions DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (‘‘Changchun’’), Guilin Pilkington Safety related to the agreed upon award Glass Co., Ltd. (‘‘Guilin’’), Wuhan amount, and asked to schedule an International Trade Administration Yaohua Pilkington Safety Glass Co., Ltd. application conference to discuss items [A–570–867] (‘‘Wuhan’’), and TCG International needed for formal application and to (‘‘TCGI’’). further clarify issues related to the Antidumping Duty Order: Automotive On March 21, 2002, the International project. Replacement Glass Windshields from Trade Commission notified the Department of its final determination Final Approval and Funding Process the People’s Republic of China. pursuant to section 735(b)(1)(A)(i) of the AGENCY: Import Administration, Final approval is subject to the Act that an industry in the United States International Trade Administration, is materially injured by reason of less- availability of funds; the submission by Department of Commerce. the applicant of a formal, complete than-fair-value imports of ARG ACTION: application and related materials that Notice of antidumping duty windshields from the PRC. order. meet the program requirements and Scope of the Investigation responsibilities of the grantee DATES: April 4, 2002. (contained in 7 CFR part 3570, subpart The products covered by this FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FOR B); the letter of conditions; and the grant investigation are ARG windshields, and FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: parts thereof, whether clear or tinted, agreement. Those preapplications that Stephen Bailey and Brandon Farlander whether coated or not, and whether or do not have sufficient priority necessary at 202–482–1102 and 202–482–0182 not they include antennas, ceramics, to receive funding consideration for FY respectively, Import Administration, mirror buttons or VIN notches, and 2002 will be notified, in writing, by the International Trade Administration, whether or not they are encapsulated. Agency’s State or designated field office. U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 ARG windshields are laminated safety Dated: March 28, 2002. Constitution Avenue, N.W., glass (i.e., two layers of (typically float) James C. Alsop, Washington, DC 20230. glass with a sheet of clear or tinted Acting Administrator, Rural Housing Service. plastic in between (usually polyvinyl Applicable Statute and Regulations [FR Doc. 02–8181 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] butyral)), which are produced and sold Unless otherwise indicated, all BILLING CODE 3410–XV–P for use by automotive glass installation citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as shops to replace windshields in amended (‘‘Act’’), are references to the automotive vehicles (e.g., passenger provisions effective January 1, 1995, the cars, light trucks, vans, sport utility COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS effective date of the amendments made vehicles, etc.) that are cracked, broken to the Act by the Uruguay Round or otherwise damaged. Sunshine Act Meeting Agreements Act. In addition, unless ARG windshields subject to this otherwise indicated, all citations to the investigation are currently classifiable AGENCY: Commission on Civil Rights. Department’s regulations are to the under subheading 7007.21.10.10 of the regulations at 19 C.F.R. part 351 (2001). Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the DATE AND TIME: Friday, April 12, 2002, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 9:30 a.m. United States (HTSUS). Specifically excluded from the scope of this Background PLACE: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, investigation are laminated automotive 624 Ninth Street, NW., Room 540, On February 12, 2002, the Department windshields sold for use in original Washington, DC 20425. issued its final determination in the assembly of vehicles. While HTSUS antidumping duty investigation of subheadings are provided for STATUS: automotive replacement glass (‘‘ARG’’) convenience and Customs purposes, our Agenda windshields from the People’s Republic written description of the scope of this I. Approval of Agenda of China (‘‘PRC’’). See Notice of Final investigation is dispositive. Determination of Sales at Less Than II. Approval of Minutes of March 8, 2002 Antidumping Duty Order Meeting Fair Value: Certain Automotive III. Announcements Replacement Glass Windshields from In accordance with section 736(a)(1) IV. Staff Director’s Report the People’s Republic of China, 67 FR of the Act, the Department is directing V. State Advisory Committee Appointments 6482 (February 12, 2002). On March 6, Customs officers to assess, upon further for Colorado, Kansas and Louisiana, and 2002, the Department issued its advice by the Department, antidumping the Approval of SAC Chairs for the District amended final determination in the duties equal to the amount by which the of Columbia and Washington State. antidumping duty investigation of ARG normal value of the merchandise VI. State Advisory Committee Report: Racism’s Frontier: The Untold Story of windshields from the PRC. See Notice of exceeds the export price (or constructed Discrimination and Division in Alaska Amended Final Determination of Sales export price) of the merchandise for all VII. Future Agenda Items at Less Than Fair Value: Certain relevant entries of ARG windshields 10:30 a.m. A Briefing on the Reauthorization Automotive Replacement Glass from the PRC. The antidumping duties of the IDEA Windshields from the People’s Republic will be assessed on all unliquidated
VerDate 11
entries of ARG windshields from the Less Than Fair Value: Certain normally deposit estimated duties on PRC entered, or withdrawn from Automotive Replacement Glass this merchandise, a cash deposit equal warehouse, for consumption on or after Windshields from the People’s Republic to the estimated weighted-average September 19, 2001, the date on which of China, 66 FR 48233 (September 19, dumping margins as noted below. The the Department published its notice of 2001). On or after the date of ‘‘All Others’’ rate applies to all exporters preliminary determination in the publication of this notice in the Federal of subject merchandise from the PRC. Federal Register. See Notice of Register, customs officers must require, The weighted-average dumping margins Preliminary Determination of Sales at at the same time as importers would are as follows:
AUTOMOTIVE REPLACEMENT GLASS WINDSHIELDS
Weighted-Average Mar- Producer/Manufacturer/Exporter gin
FYG ...... 11.80% Xinyi ...... 3.71% Benxun ...... 9.84% Changchun ...... 9.84% Guilin ...... 9.84% Wuhan ...... 9.84% TCGI ...... 9.84% China-Wide ...... 124.50%
This notice constitutes the Statutory Time Limits preliminary results of this review within antidumping duty order with respect to the original time limits mandated by Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act ARG windshields from the PRC. section 751 (a)(3)(A) of the Act. The of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires Interested parties may contact the Department is extending the time limit the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’s Central Records Unit, for completion of the preliminary Department’’) to make a preliminary room B–099 of the main Department of results by 120 days, until July 31, 2002. determination within 245 days after the Commerce building, for copies of an This extension of the time limit is in last day of the anniversary month of an updated list of antidumping duty orders accordance with section 751 (a)(3)(A) of order for which a review is requested, currently in effect. the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2). and a final determination within 120 This order is published in accordance days after the date on which the Dated: March 27, 2002 with section 736(a) of the Act. preliminary determination is published. Joseph A. Spetrini, Dated: March 29, 2002 However, if it is not practicable to Deputy Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration, Group III. Faryar Shirzad, complete the review within these time periods, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act [FR Doc. 02–8164 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. allows the Department to extend the BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S time limit for the preliminary [FR Doc. 02–8166 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] determination to a maximum of 365 BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S days and for the final determination to DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 180 days (or 300 days if the Department does not extend the time limit for the International Trade Administration DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE preliminary determination) from the [A–570–851] International Trade Administration date of publication of the preliminary determination. Certain Preserved Mushrooms from [A–507–502] Background the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of New Shipper Antidumping Administrative Review of Certain In- On August 20, 2001, the Department Duty Review published the Notice of Initiation of Shell Raw Pistachios from Iran: AGENCY: Import Administration, Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain In– International Trade Administration, Results of Antidumping Duty Department of Commerce. Administrative Review Shell Raw Pistachios from Iran, covering the period July 1, 2000 through June 30, ACTION: Notice of Initiation of New AGENCY: Import Administration, 2001 (66 FR 43570). The preliminary Shipper Antidumping Review for the International Trade Administration, results are currently due no later than period February 1, 2001, through Department of Commerce. April 2, 2002. January 31, 2002. Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary EFFECTIVE DATE: April 4, 2002. EFFECTIVE DATE: April 4, 2002. Results of Review SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The instant administrative review has received requests to conduct a new Phyllis Hall at (202) 482–1398, or Donna involves several complex issues that shipper review of the antidumping duty Kinsella at (202) 482–0194, Import necessitate a greater amount of time in order on certain preserved mushrooms Administration, International Trade order to preliminarily complete this from the People’s Republic of China. In Administration, U.S. Department of review (e.g., exchange rates, selection of accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution comparison market and complex issues the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20230. surrounding the U.S. sales). Therefore, it 19 C.F.R. 351.214(d), we are initiating a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: is not practicable to complete the review for Guangxi Yulin Oriental Food
VerDate 11
Co., Ltd., Shenzhen Qunxingyuan (‘‘Zhangzhou Jingxiang’’), in accordance In accordance with section Trading Co., Ltd., and Zhangzhou with 19 C.F.R. 351.214(c), for a new 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act, as amended, and Jingxiang Foods Co., Ltd. shipper review of the antidumping duty 19 C.F.R. 351.214(b), and based on FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: order on certain preserved mushrooms information on the record, we are Brian Smith, Import Administration, from the People’s Republic of China initiating a new shipper review for International Trade Administration, (‘‘PRC’’), which has a February Guangxi Yulin, Shenzhen Qunxingyuan U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th anniversary month. and Zhangzhou Jingxiang. Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., As required by 19 C.F.R. Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone 351.214(b)(2)(i), (ii), and (iii)(A), each Initiation of Review (202) 482–1766. company identified above has certified that it did not export certain preserved In accordance with section Applicable Statute and Regulations mushrooms to the United States during 751(a)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act and 19 C.F.R. Unless otherwise indicated, all the period of investigation (‘‘POI’’), and 351.214(d)(1), we are initiating a new citations to the Tariff Act of 1930, as that it has never been affiliated with any shipper review of the antidumping duty amended (‘‘the Act’’), are references to exporter or producer which exported order on certain preserved mushrooms the provisions effective January 1, 1995, certain preserved mushrooms during the from the PRC. In March 2002, each the effective date of the amendments POI. Each company has further certified company listed above agreed to waive made to the Act by the Uruguay Round that its export activities are not the normal time limit for the new Agreements Act. In addition, unless controlled by the central government of shipper review in order that the otherwise indicated, all citations to the the PRC, pursuant to the requirements Department, pursuant to 19 C.F.R. Department of Commerce (‘‘the of 19 C.F.R. 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(B). 351.214(j)(3), may conduct this review Department’’) regulations are to 19 Pursuant to the Department’s concurrent with the third annual C.F.R. Part 351 (2001). regulations at 19 C.F.R. administrative review of this order. The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 351.214(b)(2)(iv)(A), each company period of review for the third annual submitted documentation establishing administrative review is February 1, Background the date on which it first shipped the 2000–January 31, 2001, which is being The Department has received timely subject merchandise to the United conducted pursuant to section 751(a)(1) requests from Guangxi Yulin Oriental States, the date of entry of that first of the Act. Therefore, we intend to issue Food Co., Ltd. (‘‘Guangxi Yulin’’), shipment, the volume of that shipment the preliminary results of this new Shenzhen Qunxingyuan Trading Co., and the date of the first sale to an shipper review not later than 245 days Ltd. (‘‘Shenzhen Qunxingyuan’’), and unaffiliated customer in the United after the last day of the anniversary Zhangzhou Jingxiang Foods Co., Ltd. States. month.
Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review Proceeding Period to be Reviewed
Guangxi Yulin Oriental Food Co., Ltd...... 02/01/01 – 01/31/02 Shenzhen Qunxingyuan Trading Co., Ltd...... 02/01/01 – 01/31/02 Zhangzhou Jiangxiang Foods, Co., Ltd...... 02/01/01 – 01/31/02
We will instruct the Customs Service DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: to allow, at the option of the importer, Tipten Troidl or David Salkeld, Office of the posting, until the completion of the International Trade Administration AD/CVD Enforcement VI, Group II, review, of a bond or security in lieu of Import Administration, International Quarterly Update to Annual Listing of a cash deposit for each entry of the Trade Administration, U.S. Department Foreign Government Subsidies on of Commerce, 14th Street and merchandise exported by the above– Articles of Cheese Subject to an In- Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, listed companies. This action is in Quota Rate of Duty accordance with 19 C.F.R. 351.214(e). DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482–2786. AGENCY: Import Administration, Interested parties that need access to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section International Trade Administration, proprietary information in this new 702(a) of the Trade Agreements Act of Department of Commerce. shipper review should submit 1979 (as amended) (the Act) requires the ACTION: Publication of quarterly update applications for disclosure under Department of Commerce (the to annual listing of foreign government administrative protective orders in Department) to determine, in subsidies on articles of cheese subject to accordance with 19 C.F.R. 351.305 and consultation with the Secretary of an in-quota rate of duty. 351.306. Agriculture, whether any foreign This initiation and notice are in SUMMARY: The Department of government is providing a subsidy with accordance with section 751(a) of the Commerce, in consultation with the respect to any article of cheese subject Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)) and 19 C.F.R. Secretary of Agriculture, has prepared to an in-quota rate of duty, as defined 351.214(d). its quarterly update to the annual list of in section 702(g)(b)(4) of the Act, and to foreign government subsidies on articles publish an annual list and quarterly Dated: March 29, 2002 of cheese subject to an in-quota rate of updates of the type and amount of those Richard Moreland, duty during the period October 1, 2001 subsidies. We hereby provide the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import through December 31, 2001. We are Department’s quarterly update of Administration. publishing the current listing of those subsidies on cheeses that were imported [FR Doc. 02–8163 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] subsidies that we have determined exist. during the period October 1, 2001 BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S EFFECTIVE DATE: April 4, 2002. through December 31, 2001.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16090 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
The Department has developed, in The Department will incorporate U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th consultation with the Secretary of additional programs which are found to Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Agriculture, information on subsidies constitute subsidies, and additional Washington, DC 20230. (as defined in section 702(g)(b)(2) of the information on the subsidy programs This determination and notice are in Act) being provided either directly or listed, as the information is developed. accordance with section 702(a) of the indirectly by foreign governments on The Department encourages any Act. articles of cheese subject to an in-quota person having information on foreign Dated: March 29, 2002. rate of duty. The appendix to this notice government subsidy programs which Faryar Shirzad, lists the country, the subsidy program or benefit articles of cheese subject to an programs, and the gross and net in-quota rate of duty to submit such Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. amounts of each subsidy for which information in writing to the Assistant information is currently available. Secretary for Import Administration, Appendix
SUBSIDY PROGRAMS ON CHEESE SUBJECT TO AN IN-QUOTA RATE OF DUTY
Gross 1 sub- Net 2 subsidy Country Program(s) sidy ($/lb) ($/lb)
Austria ...... European Union Restitution Payments ...... $0.10 $0.10 Belgium ...... EU Restitution Payments ...... 0.03 0.03 Canada ...... Export Assistance on Certain Types of Cheese ...... 0.22 0.22 Denmark ...... EU Restitution Payments ...... 0.05 0.05 Finland ...... EU Restitution Payments ...... 0.14 0.14 France ...... EU Restitution Payments ...... 0.09 0.09 Germany ...... EU Restitution Payments ...... 0.06 0.06 Greece ...... EU Restitution Payments ...... 0.00 0.00 Ireland ...... EU Restitution Payments ...... 0.04 0.04 Italy ...... EU Restitution Payments ...... 0.03 0.03 Luxembourg ...... EU Restitution Payments ...... 0.07 0.07 Netherlands ...... EU Restitution Payments ...... 0.03 0.03 Norway ...... Indirect (Milk) Subsidy ...... 0.28 0.28 Consumer Subsidy ...... 0.13 0.13
Total ...... 0.41 0.41 Portugal ...... EU Restitution Payments ...... 0.04 0.04 Spain ...... EU Restitution Payments ...... 0.02 0.02 Switzerland ...... Deficiency Payments ...... 0.06 0.06 U.K...... EU Restitution Payments ...... 0.04 0.04 1 Defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(5). 2 Defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(6).
[FR Doc. 02–8165 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Trade Agreement. A second request on Panel Review is filed, a panel is BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P behalf of BC Hot House Foods, Inc. was established to act in place of national filed on the same date. Panel review was courts to review expeditiously the final requested of the final results of the final determination to determine whether it DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair conforms with the antidumping or Value respecting Greenhouse Tomatoes countervailing duty law of the country International Trade Administration From Canada made by the United States that made the determination. International Trade Administration. Under Article 1904 of the Agreement, North American Free-Trade These determinations were published in which came into force on January 1, Agreement, Article 1904 NAFTA Panel the Federal Register, (67 FR 8781) on 1994, the Government of the United Reviews; Request for Panel Review February 26, 2002. The NAFTA States, the Government of Canada and AGENCY: NAFTA Secretariat, United Secretariat has assigned Case Number the Government of Mexico established States Section, International Trade USA–CDA–2002–1904–04 to these Rules of Procedure for Article 1904 Administration, Department of requests. Binational Panel Reviews (‘‘Rules’’). Commerce. These Rules were published in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Federal Register on February 23, 1994 ACTION: Notice of First Request for Panel Caratina L. Alston, United States Review. (59 FR 8686). Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite A first Request for Panel Review was SUMMARY: On March 27, 2002, Veg Gro 2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue, filed with the United States Section of Sales, Inc. (a.k.a. K&M Produce Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482–5438. the NAFTA Secretariat, pursuant to Distributors Inc.); Red Zoo Marketing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter Article 1904 of the Agreement, on (a.k.a. Performance Produce Limited); 19 of the North American Free-Trade March 27, 2002, requesting panel review Mastronardi Produce Limited; J–D Agreement (‘‘Agreement’’) establishes a of the final determination described Marketing Inc.; and all Ontario mechanism to replace domestic judicial above. companies subject to the ‘‘all others’’ review of final determinations in The Rules provide that: rate filed a First Request for Panel antidumping and countervailing duty (a) A Party or interested person may Review with the United States Section cases involving imports from a NAFTA challenge the final determination in of the NAFTA Secretariat pursuant to country with review by independent whole or in part by filing a Complaint Article 1904 of the North American Free binational panels. When a Request for in accordance with Rule 39 within 30
VerDate 11
days after the filing of the first Request conforms with the antidumping or Administration, Department of for Panel Review (the deadline for filing countervailing duty law of the country Commerce. a Complaint is April 26, 2002); that made the determination. ACTION: Notice of decision of NAFTA (b) A Party, investigating authority or Under Article 1904 of the Agreement, Panel. interested person that does not file a which came into force on January 1, SUMMARY: Complaint but that intends to appear in 1994, the Government of the United On March 27, 2002 the support of any reviewable portion of the States, the Government of Canada and NAFTA Panel issued its decision in the final determination may participate in the Government of Mexico established matter of Pure Magnesium from Canada, the panel review by filing a Notice of Rules of Procedure for Article 1904 Secretariat File No. USA–CDA–00– Appearance in accordance with Rule 40 Binational Panel Reviews (‘‘Rules’’). 1904–06. within 45 days after the filing of the first These Rules were published in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Request for Panel Review (the deadline Federal Register on February 23, 1994 Caratina L. Alston, United States for filing a Notice of Appearance is May (59 FR 8686). The panel review in this Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite 13, 2002); and matter was conducted in accordance 2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue, (c) The panel review shall be limited with these Rules. Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482–5438. to the allegations of error of fact or law, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter including the jurisdiction of the Background Information 19 of the North American Free-Trade investigating authority, that are set out On August 4, 2000, the Government of Agreement (‘‘Agreement’’) establishes a in the Complaints filed in the panel Quebec filed a First Request for Panel mechanism to replace domestic judicial review and the procedural and Review with the U.S. Section of the review of final determinations in substantive defenses raised in the panel NAFTA Secretariat pursuant to Article antidumping and countervailing duty review. 1904 of the North American Free Trade cases involving imports from a NAFTA Dated: March 28, 2002. Agreement. Panel review was requested country with review by independent Caratina L. Alston, of the Final Results of Full Sunset binational panels. When a Request for United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat. Reviews of CVD orders made by the Panel Review is filed, a panel is established to act in place of national [FR Doc. 02–8170 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] International Trade Administration courts to review expeditiously the final BILLING CODE 3510–GT–P respecting Pure Magnesium and Alloy Magnesium from Canada. This determination to determine whether it determination was published in the conforms with the antidumping or DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Federal Register on July 5, 2000 (65 FR countervailing duty law of the country 41,444). The request was assigned File that made the determination. Under Article 1904 of the Agreement, International Trade Administration No. USA–CDA–00–1904–07. which came into force on January 1, North American Free-Trade Agreement Panel Decision 1994, the Government of the United (NAFTA), Article 1904 NAFTA Panel States, the Government of Canada and Reviews; Decision of the Panel The Panel remanded this matter back the Government of Mexico established to the Department to reconsider (i) the Rules of Procedure for Article 1904 AGENCY: NAFTA Secretariat, United determination to utilize the results of Binational Panel Reviews (‘‘Rules’’). States Section, International Trade the sixth review as the subsidy rate to These Rules were published in the Administration, Department of be reported to the ITC; (ii) the basis for Federal Register on February 23, 1994 Commerce. the all others rate; and (iii) the reasons (59 FR 8686). The panel review in this ACTION: Notice of decision of NAFTA for the failure to investigate subsidies matter was conducted in accordance Panel. alleged to have been received by with these Rules. Magnola. SUMMARY: On March 27, 2002 the The Panel ordered the Department to Background Information NAFTA Panel issued its decision in the issue a determination on remand On August 4, 2000, the Government of matter of Pure Magnesium and Alloy consistent with the instructions set forth Quebec filed a First Request for Panel Magnesium from Canada, Full Sunset in the Panel’s decision. The Review with the U.S. Section of the Reviews of Countervailing Duty Orders, determination on remand shall be NAFTA Secretariat pursuant to Article Secretariat File No. USA–CDA–00– issued within sixty (60) days of the date 1904 of the North American Free Trade 1904–07. of the Order (not later than May 27, Agreement. Panel review was requested FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2002). of the Final Results of the Full Sunset Caratina L. Alston, United States Review made by the International Trade Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite Dated: March 29, 2002. Caratina L. Alston, Administration respecting Pure 2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue, Magnesium from Canada. This United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat. Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482–5438. determination was published in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter [FR Doc. 02–8169 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Federal Register on July 5, 2000 (65 FR 19 of the North American Free-Trade BILLING CODE 3510–GT–P 41,436). The request was assigned File Agreement (‘‘Agreement’’) establishes a No. USA–CDA–00–1904–06. mechanism to replace domestic judicial review of final determinations in DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Panel Decision antidumping and countervailing duty International Trade Administration The Panel remanded this matter back cases involving imports from a NAFTA to the Department to reconsider (1) the country with review by independent North American Free-Trade Agreement GOC’s claims regarding ‘‘good cause’’ binational panels. When a Request for (NAFTA), Article 1904 NAFTA Panel under the standards set forth in Section Panel Review is filed, a panel is Reviews; Decision of the Panel 752(c)(2) of the statute; and (2) the established to act in place of national determination to report the investigation courts to review expeditiously the final AGENCY: NAFTA Secretariat, United rate as the margin of dumping likely to determination to determine whether it States Section, International Trade prevail if the order is revoked.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16092 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
The Panel ordered the Department to USPTO. The USPTO uses this collection information collection requirement issue a determination on remand to identify the status of any existing concerning report of shipment. A consistent with the instructions set forth badges for the user, update user request for public comments was in the Panel’s decision. The information, and track the use of published in the Federal Register at 67 determination on remand shall be USPTO facilities and services. FR 6233, on February 11, 2002. No issued within sixty (60) days of the date Affected Public: Individuals or comments were received. of the Order (not later than May 27, households, businesses or other for- Public comments are particularly 2002). profits, not-for-profit institutions, farms, invited on: Whether this collection of Dated: March 29, 2002. the federal government, and state, local, information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the FAR, Caratina L. Alston, or tribal governments. Frequency: On occasion and annually and whether it will have practical United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat. for renewals. utility; whether our estimate of the [FR Doc. 02–8168 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Respondent’s Obligation: Required to public burden of this collection of BILLING CODE 3510–61–P obtain or retain benefits. information is accurate, and based on OMB Desk Officer: David Rostker, valid assumptions and methodology; (202) 395–3897. ways to enhance the quality, utility, and DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Copies of the above information clarity of the information to be Patent and Trademark Office collection proposal can be obtained by collected; and ways in which we can calling or writing Susan K. Brown, minimize the burden of the collection of Submission for OMB Review; Records Officer, Office of Data information on those who are to Comment Request Management, Data Administration respond, through the use of appropriate Division, USPTO, Suite 310, 2231 technological collection techniques or The United States Patent and Crystal Drive, Washington, DC 20231, other forms of information technology. Trademark Office (USPTO) has by phone at (703) 308–7400, or by e- DATES: Submit comments on or before submitted to the Office of Management mail at [email protected]. May 6, 2002. and Budget (OMB) for clearance the Written comments and following proposal for collection of ADDRESSES: Submit comments regarding recommendations for the proposed this burden estimate or any other aspect information under the provisions of the information collection should be sent on Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. of this collection of information, or before May 6, 2002, to David Rostker, including suggestions for reducing this Chapter 35). OMB Desk Officer, Room 10202, New Agency: United States Patent and burden to: FAR Desk Officer, OMB, Executive Office Building, 725 17th Room 10102, NEOB, Washington, DC Trademark Office (USPTO). Street NW., Washington, DC 20503. Title: Public User ID Badging 20503, and a copy to the General (formerly Public Search Room Badging). Dated: March 27, 2002. Services Administration, FAR Form Number(s): PTO–2030. Susan K. Brown, Secretariat (MVP), 1800 F Streets, NW., Agency Approval Number: 0651– Records Officer, USPTO, Office of Data Room 4035, Washington, DC 20405. 0041. Management, Data Administration Division. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Type of Request: Extension of a [FR Doc. 02–8098 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Linda Klein, Acquisition Policy currently approved collection. BILLING CODE 3510–16–P Division, GSA (202) 501–3775. Burden: 1,076 hours annually. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Number of Respondents: 9,360 A. Purpose responses per year. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Avg. Hours Per Response: The USPTO Military (and, as required, civilian estimates that it will take the public GENERAL SERVICES agency) storage and distribution points, approximately five minutes to gather the ADMINISTRATION depots, and other receiving activities necessary information, prepare the form, require advance notice of large and submit the completed application NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND shipments enroute from contractors’ for a Public User ID or to renew or SPACE ADMINISTRATION plants. Timely receipt of notices by the replace a Public User ID badge, and [OMB Control No. 9000–0056] consignee transportation office approximately ten minutes to supply precludes the incurring of demurrage any optional information to the USPTO Federal Acquisition Regulation; and vehicle detention charges. The staff, have the photograph taken, and be Submission for OMB Review; Report of information is used to alert the receiving issued a Public User ID badge. Shipment activity of the arrival of a large Needs and Uses: This information shipment. collection supports the Public User ID AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DOD), system used to manage the public’s General Services Administration (GSA), B. Annual Reporting Burden access to the Public Search Facilities and National Aeronautics and Space Respondents: 250. and other office areas of the USPTO. In Administration (NASA). Responses Per Respondent: 4. order to maintain the patent and ACTION: Notice of request for an Annual Responses: 1,000. trademark search facilities so that the extension to an existing OMB clearance. Hours Per Response: .167. information is available to the public, Total Burden Hours: 167. the USPTO uses an electronic badging SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Obtaining Copies of Proposals: system to issue plastic ID badges with Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Requesters may obtain a copy of the a color photograph of the user, a user U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Federal information collection documents from number, and an expiration date. The Acquisition Regulation (FAR) the General Services Administration, public uses this collection to request, Secretariat has submitted to the Office FAR Secretariat (MVP), Room 4035, renew, or replace a Public User ID badge of Management and Budget (OMB) a 1800 F Street, NW., Washington, DC in order to access the search facilities, request to review and approve an 20405, telephone (202) 501–4755. Please its services, and other office areas of the extension of a currently approved cite OMB Control No. 9000–0056,
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16093
Report of Shipment, in all 20503, and a copy to the General SUMMARY: In accordance with section correspondence. Services Administration, FAR 10(a)(2) of Public Law 92–463, The Dated: March 28, 2002. Secretariat (MVP), 1800 F Streets, NW., Federal Advisory Committee Act, Room 4035, Washington, DC 20405. Al Matera, announcement is made of the following FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: meeting: Director, Acquisition Policy Division. Victoria Moss, Acquisition Policy Name of Committee: Armed Forces [FR Doc. 02–8159 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Division, GSA (202) 501–4764. Epidemiological Board (AFEB). BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dates: May 21, 2002 (Partially closed meeting). May 22, 2002 (Open meeting). A. Purpose Times: 7:30 a.m.–4:30 p.m. (May 21, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE The North Carolina Sales and Use Tax 2002). 7:30 a.m. 1 p.m. (May 22, 2002). GENERAL SERVICES Act authorizes counties and Location: Gaithersburg Marriott ADMINISTRATION incorporated cities and towns to obtain Washingtonian Center, 9751 each year from the Commissioner of Washingtonian Blvd, Gaithersburg, MD NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND Revenue of the State of North Carolina 20878. SPACE ADMINISTRATION a refund of sales and use taxes Agenda: The purpose of the meeting indirectly paid on building materials, is to address pending and new Board [OMB Control No. 9000–0059] supplies, fixtures, and equipment that issues, provide briefings for Board become a part of or are annexed to any members on topics related to ongoing Federal Acquisition Regulation; building or structure in North Carolina. and new Board issues, conduct Submission for OMB Review; North However, to substantiate a refund claim subcommittee meetings, and conduct an Carolina Sales Tax Certification for sales or use taxes paid on purchases executive working session, and to have AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DOD), of building materials, supplies, fixtures, a classified AFEB update on the DoD General Services Administration (GSA), or equipment by a contractor, the Immunization Program for Biological and National Aeronautics and Space Government must secure from the Warfare Defense in accordance with Administration (NASA). contractor certified statements setting DoD Directive 6205.3. forth the cost of the property purchased ACTION: Notice of request for an FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lt extension to an existing OMB clearance. from each vendor and the amount of Col James R. Riddle, Executive sales or use taxes paid. Similar certified Secretary, Armed Forces SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the statements by subcontractors must be Epidemiological Board, Skyline Six, Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 obtained by the general contractor and 5109 Leesburg Pike, Room 682, Falls U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Federal furnished to the Government. The Church, Virginia 22041–3258, (703) Acquisition Regulation (FAR) information is used as evidence to 681–8012/3. Secretariat has submitted to the Office establish exemption from State and local taxes. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This of Management and Budget (OMB) a meeting will be partially closed to the request to review and approve an B. Annual Reporting Burden public on May 21st. Open sessions of extension of a currently approved the meeting will be limited by space information collection requirement Respondents: 424. Responses Per Respondent: 1. accommodations. The meeting on May concerning North Carolina sales tax Annual Responses: 424. 22nd will be open to the public in certification. A request for public Hours Per Response: .17. accordance with section 552b(c) of Title comments was published at 67 FR 6237, Total Burden Hours: 72. 5, U.S.C., specifically subparagraph (1) on February 11, 2002. No comments Obtaining Copies of Proposals: thereof and Title 5, U.S.C., specifically were received. Requesters may obtain a copy of the subparagraph (1) thereof and Title 5, Public comments are particularly information collection documents from U.S.C., appendix 1, subsection 10(d). invited on: Whether this collection of the General Services Administration, Any interested person may attend, information is necessary for the proper FAR Secretariat (MVP), Room 4035, appear before or file statements with the performance of functions of the FAR, 1800 F Street, NW., Washington, DC committee at the time and in the and whether it will have practical 20405, telephone (202) 501–4755. Please manner permitted by the committee. utility; whether our estimate of the cite OMB Control No. 9000–0059, North public burden of this collection of Carolina Sales Tax Certification, in all Luz D. Ortiz, information is accurate, and based on correspondence. Army Federal Register Liaison Officer. valid assumptions and methodology; Dated: March 28, 2002. [FR Doc. 02–8177 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] ways to enhance the quality, utility, and Al Matera, BILLING CODE 3710–08–M clarity of the information to be collected; and ways in which we can Director, Acquisition Policy Division. minimize the burden of the collection of [FR Doc. 02–8160 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE information on those who are to BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P respond, through the use of appropriate Department of the Army; Corps of technological collection techniques or Engineers DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE other forms of information technology. Intent To Prepare a Programmatic DATES: Submit comments on or before Department of the Army Supplemental Environmental Impact May 6, 2002. Statement for the Louisiana Coastal Armed Forces Epidemiological Board; ADDRESSES: Submit comments regarding Area, LouisianalComprehensive Meeting this burden estimate or any other aspect Coastwide Ecosystem Restoration of this collection of information, AGENCY: Department of the Army; DoD. Feasibility Study including suggestions for reducing this ACTION: Notice of partially-closed burden to: FAR Desk Officer, OMB, AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. meeting. Room 10102, NEOB, Washington, DC Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16094 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
ACTION: Notice of intent. CEMVN–PM–RS, P.O. Box 60267, New evaluate the restoration strategies Orleans, Louisiana 70160–0267, identified in the Coast 2050 Plan for SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) telephone (504) 862–2540 or fax (504) each of the four major hydrologic of the National Environmental Policy 862–2572. Questions regarding the regions of the state, developing those Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, the proposed action should be directed to strategies, and selecting plans that best U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New the study manager, Mr. Troy Constance, address the ecosystem restoration needs Orleans District (Corps) intends to CEMVN–PM–W, P.O. Box 60267, New for the entire Louisiana coastal area, prepare a draft programmatic Orleans, Louisiana 70160–0267, while complying with applicable rules, supplemental environmental impact telephone (504) 862–2742 or fax: (504) regulations and administration policy. statement (PSEIS) for the Louisiana 862–1892. The purpose of the LCA Coastal Area, Louisiana— SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: Comprehensive Study is to determine Comprehensive Coastwide Ecosystem the feasibility of sustaining a coastal 1. Authority Restoration Feasibility Study ecosystem that supports and protects (hereinafter LCA Comprehensive This study is authorized through the environment, economy and culture Study). The LCA Comprehensive Study Resolutions of the U.S. House of of southern Louisiana and that will build on the restoration strategies Representatives and Senate Committees contributes greatly to the economy and presented in the Coast 2050 Plan and on Public Works, October 19, 1967 and well being of the nation. Specifically, the May 1999, 905(b) Reconnaissance April 19, 1967. the LCA Comprehensive Study will Report ‘‘Section 905(b) (WRDA 86) 2. Proposed Action determine the feasibility of achieving Analysis Louisiana Coastal Area, the following restoration goals: Louisiana—Ecosystem Restoration.’’ Building on the Coast 2050 Plan and 1. Sustaining a coastal ecosystem with the May 1999, 905(b) Reconnaissance The expected outcome of the LCA the essential functions and values of the Report, the Corps proposes to prepare a Comprehensive Study is the natural ecosystem; PSEIS for the LCA Comprehensive identification of restoration projects that 2. Restoring the ecosystem to the Study. The proposed action would would result in sustaining a coastal highest practicable acreage of assess, at a feasibility programmatic- ecosystem that supports and protects productive and diverse wetlands; and level, coastal restoration projects that the environment, economy and culture 3. Accomplishing this restoration of southern Louisiana and that would sustain a coastal ecosystem that supports and protects the environment, through an integrated program that has contributes greatly to the economy and multiple use benefits, benefits not solely well being of the nation. More than a economy and culture of Southern Louisiana and that contributes greatly to for wetlands, but for all the million acres of Louisiana coastal communities, industries and resources wetlands have been lost within the last the economy and well being of the nation. The LCA Comprehensive Study of the coast. 60 years with current estimates of the 4. Developing a comprehensive plan Louisiana coastal land loss rate ranging will supplement previous NEPA documents, combining the ‘‘lessons that is coordinated and consistent with between 25 and 30 square miles per other major land use and infrastructure annually (16,000 to 19,000 acres), or learned’’ from previous Louisiana coastal wetlands restoration efforts, and features, particularly with respect to about one football field every 25 navigation, hurricane protection/flood minutes. Louisiana contains about 40 develop the existing Coast 2050 restoration strategies into projects for control, and oil and gas production. percent of the wetlands in the United The LCA Comprehensive Study, in States; yet, nearly 80 percent of all the creation of a programmatic, coast- wide, ecosystem restoration plan. addition to conducting a programmatic coastal land loss in the lower 48 states environmental impact assessment, will today is occurring within Louisiana. In December 1998 the Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and supplement the findings from the Even with current restoration efforts, Restoration Task Force and the following NEPA documents: Louisiana is projected to lose nearly Wetlands Conservation Authority 1. The draft EIS ‘‘Land Loss and 400,000 acres of marsh and 232,000 (constituted under Act 6 R.S. 49:213.1 et Marsh Creation, St. Bernard, acres of swamp by the year 2050, an seq.) prepared and adopted the Coast Plaquemines and Jefferson Parishes, area the size of Rhode Island. 2050 Plan as their official restoration Louisiana’’ (USACE 1990); The LCA Comprehensive Study will plan. The December 1998 report ‘‘Coast 2. The EIS titled ‘‘Coastal Wetlands supplement previous NEPA-compliance 2050: Toward a Sustainable Coastal Planning, Protection and Restoration studies, combining the ‘‘lessons Louisiana’’, also known as the ‘‘Coast Act Louisiana Coastal Wetlands learned’’ from previous Louisiana 2050 Plan’’, was developed in Restoration Plan’’ (La Coastal Wetlands coastal wetlands restoration efforts, and recognition of the need for a single Conservation and Restoration Task determine the feasibility of developing comprehensive plan for restoration and Force, 1993); and the existing Coast 2050 restoration sustainability of the Louisiana coastal 3. The ‘‘Programmatic Hydrologic strategies into projects for the creation area. The Coast 2050 Plan, which has Management Environmental Impact of a programmatic, coast-wide, been recognized by the state of Statement and Appendixes’’ (USACE ecosystem restoration plan. The LCA Louisiana, five Federal agencies, and the 1996). Comprehensive Study is envisioned as local coastal parish governments of Additionally, the LCA Comprehensive the next step in the natural progression Louisiana, serves as the joint coastal Study will utilize and compliment the and evolution in our efforts to address restoration plan of the Coastal Wetlands findings from the following reports and the problems and determine Planning, Protection, and Restoration studies: opportunities for the adaptive Act (CWPPRA) and the Louisiana State 1. The ‘‘Mississippi and Louisiana environmental assessment and Wetlands Authority (November 1990, Estuarine Areas Reconnaissance Report’’ restoration of the coastal wetlands of Pub. L. 101–646, Title III). (USACE 1981); Louisiana. The LCA Comprehensive Study will 2. The ‘‘Louisiana Coastal Area, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: assess, at a programmatic feasibility- Louisiana, Shore and Barrier Island Questions regarding the PSEIS may be level, the Coast 2050 Plan. Specifically, Erosion’’ Initial Evaluation Study directed to Dr. William P. Klein, Jr., the LCA Comprehensive Study will (USACE 1984);
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16095
3. MRC/MVD Task Group Report The CWPPRA provides an annual $5 the creation of a programmatic, coast- (USACE 1985); million (approximately) for planning wide, ecosystem restoration plan. The 4. Louisiana Coastal Area-Mississippi and $33 million (approximately) for the LCA Comprehensive Study is the next River Delta Study Recon (USACE 1990); construction of restoration projects that step in the natural progression and 5. Louisiana Coastal Area—Ecosystem are typically small in scale and site- evolution in our understanding and Restoration, Louisiana reconnaissance specific rather than ecosystem level efforts to address the problems and report approved May 1999; and restoration efforts. Over the past 10 determine opportunities for the adaptive 6. Mississippi River Sediment, years the CWPPRA, with the completion environmental assessment and Nutrient, and Freshwater Redistribution of the 11th Priority Project List in 2001, restoration of the coastal wetlands of (MRSNFR) Study (USACE 2000). has authorized a total of 125 projects. Louisiana. In the 1970s, studies and plans by When constructed, all of the projects, to 3. Need for the Study state, Federal and other interested date, would create, restore, protect, or parties recognized the coastal land loss enhance approximately 105,000 acres at The 905(b) Reconnaissance Report problem in Louisiana (e.g. Gagliano et a cost of approximately $496 million recommended that the Coast 2050 plan al. 1972 report ‘‘Environmental Atlas dollars. Despite the acres gained by proceed to the feasibility phase, and Multi-use Management Plan for implementation of the CWPPRA-funded contingent upon the execution of a South-Central Louisiana’’). Public projects, these acres and those preserved Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement recognition of not only the by the existing freshwater diversions (FCSA) with a non-Federal Sponsor. An environmental importance, but also the from the Mississippi River would FCSA was executed with the Louisiana economic importance of the rapidly prevent only about 25–30 percent of the Department of Natural Resources on disappearing coastal wetlands in predicted future marsh loss in February 17, 2000 and amended on Louisiana prompted an amendment to Louisiana. There continues to be a need March 14, 2002. the Louisiana constitution in 1989: Act for an adaptive assessment and The 905(b) Reconnaissance Report 6, LA. R.S. 49:213 et seq. Known also restoration effort of coastal Louisiana at estimates that more than a million acres known as the Louisiana Coastal the ecosystem level which will require of Louisiana coastal wetlands have been Wetlands Conservation, Restoration and significantly greater funding than was lost within the last 60 years and the Management Act, Act 6 established the conceptualized and is authorized for the current land loss rate ranges between 25 Governor’s Office of Coastal Activities, CWPPRA because the state continues to and 30 square miles per annually the Office of Coastal Restoration suffer a net loss of ranging between (16,000 to 19,000 acres), or about one Management within the Department of approximately 25 to 30 square miles of football field every 25 minutes. This Natural Resources, as well as providing coastal wetlands per year. accounts for nearly 80 percent of all for a dedicated trust fund for coastal In recognition of the need for a single, coastal land loss in the lower 48 states wetlands restoration. Act 6 also directs coast-wide restoration plan, the Coast today. The 905(b) Reconnaissance the production of the annual Coastal 2050 Plan was developed and is Report concludes that even with current Wetlands Conservation and Restoration described in the December 1998 ‘‘Coast restoration efforts, Louisiana is Plan, which provides site-specific 2050: Towards a Sustainable Coastal projected to lose nearly 400,000 acres of project authorization. Louisiana.’’ The Coast 2050 Plan marsh and 232,000 acres of swamp by Continuing in the evolution of developed as an outgrowth of lessons the year 2050, an area the size of Rhode Louisiana coastal restoration efforts, the learned during implementation of Island. November 1990, CWPPRA provided the restoration projects under the CWPPRA. In February 2002, the Governor’s first national mandate addressing the The Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Committee on the Future of Coastal need for restoration of Louisiana’s Conservation and Restoration Task Louisiana (COFCL) prepared a report, coastal wetlands. The CWPPRA Force and the Wetlands Conservation ‘‘Saving Coastal Louisiana: required preparation of a Authority prepared and adopted the Recommendations for Implementing an comprehensive restoration plan that Coast 2050 Plan as their official Expanded Coastal Restoration Program,’’ would coordinate and integrate coastal restoration plan. The Coast 2050 Plan which provided recommendations as a wetlands restoration projects to ensure was provided to the U.S. Department of starting point for a renewed and the long-term conservation of coastal Commerce by the State of Louisiana to expanded coastal restoration effort. The wetlands of Louisiana. In addition to incorporate it into the Louisiana Coastal COFCL report characterizes Louisiana’s development of the restoration plan, the Resources Program Guidelines. In land loss crisis as an emergency of CWPPRA authorizes the construction of addition, the Coast 2050 Plan was untold cost to the state of Louisiana and wetland protection and restoration affirmed by resolutions of support from the nation that must be confronted now, projects, via Project Priority Lists, the local coastal parish governments. with all available resources. The preparation of a wetland conservation The Coast 2050 Plan was used as a basis devastation of the coastal land loss will, plan, and implementation of a to produce the May 1999, according to the COFCL report, directly feasibility study to consider flow Reconnaissance Report ‘‘Section 905(b) affect our nation’s security, navigation, distribution between the Atchafalaya (WRDA 86) Analysis Louisiana Coastal energy consumption, and food supply. and Mississippi rivers. Area, Louisiana—Ecosystem The COFCL report further elaborates Section 303(b) of the CWPPRA Restoration,’’ recommending that the that the potential loss of lives, requires preparation of a comprehensive strategies contained within the Coast infrastructure, industry, ecosystems and restoration plan. The CWPPRA Main 2050 Plan proceed to feasibility level culture cannot be overstated. Report and EIS entitled ‘‘Louisiana analysis. Coastal Wetlands Restoration Plan’’ was The LCA Comprehensive Study will 4. Study Alternatives prepared by the CWPPRA Task Force supplement previous NEPA documents During the Coast 2050 public and completed in November 1993. and utilize and compliment previous meetings conducted in 1998, 83 regional Implementation of the November 1990 reports and studies (as described above), ecosystem restoration strategies were CWPPRA has provided the primary combining the ‘‘lessons learned’’ from developed. In January 2001, these experiential basis for coastal restoration these efforts and developing the existing strategies were revised into 88 regional experiences across the Louisiana coast. restoration strategies into projects for ecosystem restoration strategies. The
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16096 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
LCA Comprehensive Study will develop comments to the Corps using Dr. Klein’s Dated: March 20, 2002. these strategies into features that will be mailing address shown above. Michel R. Burt, developed further into an array of Comments received as a result of the Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army, Acting District alternatives that consist of projects. scoping meetings will be compiled and Engineer. Other restoration alternatives that will analyzed; a Scoping Document, [FR Doc. 02–8175 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] be considered include the No Action summarizing the comments, will be BILLING CODE 3710–84–P Alternative, as well as strategies made available to all scoping suggested during the scoping process. participants. Additional public meetings Alternatives will be evaluated to ensure will be held and comments accepted compliance with current Federal and throughout the scoping process. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION state laws and regulations. Potential adverse effects of strategies will be 7. Public Involvement [CFDA No.: 84.310A] identified and recommendations for mitigation measures, if appropriate, will Scoping is a critical component of the Parental Information and Resource be suggested. A programmatic overall public involvement program. An Centers Program supplemental EIS is being prepared intensive public involvement program because of the potential for significant will be initiated and maintained AGENCY: Department of Education. direct and indirect, secondary and throughout the study to solicit input ACTION: Notice of proposed priority, cumulative impacts on the human and from affected Federal, state, and local selection criteria, and eligibility natural environment. agencies, Indian tribes, and other requirements. 5. Scoping Process interested parties. SUMMARY: We propose a competitive The Council on Environmental 8. Interagency Coordination preference priority, selection criteria, Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing and eligibility requirements for grants the NEPA direct federal agencies which The Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Interagency for fiscal year (FY) 2002 under the have made a decision to prepare an Parental Information and Resource Coordination. The Department of environmental impact statement to Centers (PIRC) Program. We are taking Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service engage in a public scoping process. The this action to implement a competition scoping process is designed to provide (USFWS), will provide a Fish and authorized under the No Child Left an early and open means of determining Wildlife Coordination Act Report. Behind Act of 2001. These grants would the scope of issues (problems, needs, Coordination will be maintained with assist eligible parties in establishing and opportunities) to be identified and the USFWS and the National Marine school-based or school-linked PIRCs. addressed in the draft environmental Fisheries Service regarding threatened DATES: We must receive your comments impact assessment, which in this case is and endangered species under their on the proposed priority, selection a PSEIS. Scoping is the process used to: respective jurisdictional (a) Identify the affected public and criteria, and eligibility requirements responsibilities. Coordination will be May 6, 2002. agency concerns; (b) facilitate an maintained with the Natural Resources ADDRESSES: efficient PSEIS preparation process; (c) Conservation Service regarding prime Address all comments about this proposed priority to Daisy define the issues and alternatives that and unique farmlands. The U.S. Greenfield, Office of Elementary and will be examined in detail in the PSEIS; Department of Agriculture will be and (d) save time in the overall process Secondary Education, U.S. Department consulted regarding the ‘‘Swampbuster’’ by helping to ensure that the draft of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, provisions of the Food Security Act. statements adequately address relevant SW, Room 3E307, Washington, DC issues. Scoping is a process, not an Coordination will be maintained with 20202–6410. Telephone: (202) 401– event or a meeting. It continues the Advisory Counsel on Historic 0039. FAX: (202) 205–0303. If you throughout the planning for a PSEIS and Preservation and the State Historic prefer to send your comments through may involve meetings, telephone Preservation Officer. The Louisiana the Internet, use the following address: conversations, and/or written Department of Natural Resources will be [email protected]. comments. (Counsel on Environmental consulted regarding consistency with If you want to comment on the Quality, Memorandum for General the Coastal Zone Management Act. The information collection requirements, Counsel, April 30, 1981). Louisiana Department of Wildlife and you must send your comments to the Fisheries will be contacted concerning Department representative named in 6. Public Scoping Meetings potential impacts to Natural and Scenic this section. In the early spring of 2002, the U.S. Streams. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Army Corps of Engineers will hold Daisy Greenfield, (202) 401–0039. initial public scoping meetings 9. Availability of Draft PSEIS If you use a telecommunications throughout the coastal Louisiana study It is anticipated that the Draft PSEIS device for the deaf (TDD), you may call area. Notices will be mailed to the will be available for public review the Federal Information Relay Service affected and interested public once the during the late summer of 2003. A 45- (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 between 8:00 dates and locations of the scoping a.m. and 8:00 p.m. meetings have been established. The day review period will be allowed so USACE and the local sponsor—the that all interested agencies, groups and Individuals with disabilities may Louisiana Department of Natural individuals will have an opportunity to obtain this document in an alternative Resources, invite NEPA input in writing comment on the draft feasibility report format (e.g., Braille, large print, or in person concerning the scope of the and PSEIS. In addition, a public meeting audiotape, or computer diskette) on PSEIS, resources to be evaluated, and will be held during the review period to request to the contact person listed alternatives to be considered. Federal, receive comments and address under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. state, and local agencies, Indian tribes, questions concerning the draft PSEIS. and other interested parties can write SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate 11
Invitation To Comment Services that we fund under the ESEA and may also assist schools with We invite you to submit comments Parental Information and Resource activities listed in section 5564(b). regarding the proposed priority, Centers Program should use up-to-date The new PIRC provisions require the selection criteria, and eligibility knowledge from research and effective Secretary, to the extent practicable, to requirements. All comments submitted practices. The proposed project should ensure that grants are distributed in all in response to this notice will be integrate strategies, methods, and regions of the United States. Currently available for public inspection, during practices that, on the basis of strong there is a parent center funded under and after the comment period, in Room evidence of effectiveness, will most title IV of Goals 2000 in each State, 3E307, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, likely enhance parental involvement in including the District of Columbia, Washington, DC, between the hours of schools and improve student academic Puerto Rico, and each of the outlying 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Eastern time, achievement. areas. The Secretary will continue to Monday through Friday of each week Centers funded under this program fund those centers for the remainder of except Federal holidays. must be school-based or school-linked their respective project periods. PIRCs and provide comprehensive training, in 28 States have one year left in their Assistance to Individual With information, and support to (1) parents project periods and, thus, each of those Disabilities in Reviewing the of children enrolled in elementary and will receive a continuation award from Rulemaking Record secondary schools; (2) individuals who the FY 2002 PIRC funds under the On request, we will supply an work with the parents of children reauthorized ESEA. appropriate aid, such as a reader or enrolled in elementary and secondary PIRCs in the following States are in print magnifier, to an individual with a schools; (3) State educational agencies the last year of their project periods and, disability who needs assistance to (SEAs), LEAs, schools, organizations therefore, will not receive continuation review the comments. If you want to that support family-school partnerships funding: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, schedule an appointment for this type of (such as parent-teacher associations and Arkansas, American Samoa, aid, please contact the person listed Parents as Teachers organizations), and Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION other organizations that carry out parent Islands, Connecticut, Delaware, the CONTACT. education and family involvement Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, programs; and (4) parents of children General Louisiana, Montana, Mississippi, from birth through age five. Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Subpart 16 of title V of the Elementary Each PIRC must serve both urban and Oregon, Puerto Rico, the Republic of the and Secondary Education Act of 1965 rural areas. To assist parents who are (ESEA), as amended by the No Child Marshall Islands, the Republic of Palau, severely educationally or economically Rhode Island, South Carolina, U.S. Left Behind Act of 2001 (No Child Left disadvantaged, a PIRC must use at least Behind Act) (Pub. L. 107–110), Virgin Islands, Utah, Virginia, West 50 percent of the each year’s award to Virginia, and Wyoming. authorizes the Secretary of Education serve areas with high concentrations of (Secretary) to award grants to nonprofit To comply with Congress’ intent that low-income families. grants be distributed, to the extent organizations and to consortia of Compared to previous PIRC nonprofit organizations and local practicable, to all regions of the United legislation in title IV of the Goals 2000: States, the Secretary proposes to give a educational agencies (LEAs), to Educate America Act, the No Child Left establish school-based and school- competitive preference of 10 additional Behind Act emphasizes support for points to the highest-scoring applicant linked PIRCs. activities that assist parents in The purposes of the program are— from each of the States in which the participating effectively in their (1) To assist grantees in implementing current PIRC projects are ending. This children’s education so that their effective parental involvement policies, selection process would still permit the children will meet State and local programs, and activities that will Department to fund applications of academic standards. For example, PIRCs improve children’s academic exceptional quality from any State— must now assist parents in areas such as achievement; whether or not a PIRC in the State (2) To develop and strengthen understanding State and local standards received a continuation award from FY partnerships among parents—including and measures of student and school 2002 funds—and to fund more than one parents of children from birth through academic achievement. They must work PIRC in a State if this were warranted. age five—teachers, principals, with SEAs and LEAs to determine The Secretary is also proposing administrators, and other school parental needs and the best means for specific selection criteria for the FY personnel in meeting the educational delivery of services. PIRCs may also 2002 competition. The criteria are needs of children; assist parents in communicating better designed to help ensure that applicants (3) To develop and strengthen the with teachers, principals, counselors, selected for grants are those that (1) relationship between parents and their and other school personnel, and in propose activities that best address the child’s school; becoming active participants in the statutory purposes and requirements, (2) (4) To further the developmental development, implementation, and can effectively implement those progress of children assisted under the review of school-parent compacts, activities, and (3) are likely to be program; parental involvement policies, and successful in improving student and (5) To coordinate activities funded school planning and improvement. school academic achievement. under this program with parental PIRCs must now use at least 30 Both the predecessor and current involvement initiatives funded under percent of their funds each year to PIRC legislation require that grants be section 1118 and other provisions of the establish, expand, or operate early made to nonprofit organizations, or to ESEA; and childhood parent education programs, consortia of nonprofit organizations and (6) To provide a comprehensive such as Parents as Teachers programs or LEAs. The organization or consortium approach to improving student learning, Home Instruction for Preschool must be governed by a board of directors through coordination and integration of Youngsters programs. PIRCs must also whose membership includes parents, or Federal, State, and local services and support one or more of the specific be an entity that represents the interests programs. activities listed in section 5564(a) of the of parents. Under the Department’s
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16098 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
interpretation of the predecessor (1) The proposed project will provide between parents and their child’s legislation, the term ‘‘nonprofit services to or otherwise address the school; organization’’ for purposes of the PIRC needs of parents who are educationally (ii) Assist parents in understanding program did not include institutions of or economically disadvantaged; the student academic achievement higher education, State educational (2) The training, information, and standards to which their child is being agencies, local educational agencies, support services currently available held and the measures of student and intermediate school districts, schools, inadequately address the needs of the school academic achievement; government entities, or hospitals. Given parents the proposed project will serve; (iii) Assist parents in becoming the statutory language concerning the and involved in their child’s education in governance and purposes of the PIRCs, (3) The children of the parents the meaningful ways that are likely to we believe that this is also the proper proposed project will serve are not improve the child’s academic interpretation of the term ‘‘nonprofit meeting State or local academic achievement; organization’’ under the new PIRC achievement standards. (iv) Provide services that reflect up-to- legislation. (b) Quality of the design of the date knowledge from research and After considering the responses to this proposed PIRC (25) effective practices; and notice and other information available In evaluating the quality of the design (v) Provide to parents services that to the Department, we will announce in of the proposed PIRC, we consider the will likely improve the developmental a notice in the Federal Register the final extent to which— progress of children, including children priority, selection criteria, and (1) The proposed PIRC will be a from birth through age five. eligibility requirements under this school-based or school-linked center of (d) Quality of the PIRC personnel (10) competition for FY 2002. adequate size, scope, and quality to In evaluating the quality of the serve effectively the parents in the area; personnel who will carry out the PIRC Note: This notice does not solicit (2) The proposed PIRC is designed to activities, we consider— applications. A notice inviting applications work in coordination with the SEA and (1) The extent to which the applicant under the competition will be published in the Federal Register concurrent with or affected LEAs (i) in determining the encourages applications for employment following the notice of final priority, needs of the parents who will be from persons who are members of selection criteria, and eligibility targeted for assistance; and (ii) in groups that have been traditionally requirements. developing an effective means for underrepresented based on race, color, providing services to those parents; national origin, gender, age, or Priority (3) The proposed PIRC is designed to disability; coordinate and integrate activities We propose to give a competitive (2) The qualifications, including funded under this grant with parental preference under the PIRC competition relevant training and experience, of the involvement activities funded from to any applicant that— PIRC director; other sources, particularly title I of the (3) The qualifications, including (1) Is from one of the following States: Elementary and Secondary Education relevant training and experience, of key Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Act, as amended, and the Individuals PIRC personnel; and American Samoa, Commonwealth of the with Disabilities Education Act; (4) The qualifications, including Northern Mariana Islands, Connecticut, (4) The proposed PIRC will support relevant training and experience, of Delaware, the Federated States of effective early childhood parent PIRC consultants or subcontractors. Micronesia, Guam, Idaho, Illinois, education programs that will enhance (e) Evaluation (25) Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, school readiness; In evaluating the quality of the Mississippi, Nebraska, New Mexico, (5) The proposed project includes evaluation the applicant proposes to North Dakota, Oregon, Puerto Rico, the multiple strategies for providing direct conduct of the proposed project, we Republic of the Marshall Islands, the and indirect services for parents consider the extent to which the Republic of Palau, Rhode Island, South targeted for assistance; and methods of evaluation— Carolina, U.S. Virgin Islands, Utah, (6) The proposed PIRC will (1) Are thorough, feasible, and Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming; implement a management plan that appropriate to the goals, objectives, and and includes clearly defined outcomes of the proposed project; (2) Is the highest-scoring applicant responsibilities, timelines, and (2) Produce quantitative and from its State on the basis of the milestones for meeting the purposes of qualitative data; and selection criteria for the competition. the program as defined in section 5661 (3) Will result in data on whether the We would award 10 points to any of the legislation. policies and practices of the PIRC are applicant that meets the priority. These (c) Quality of the services (20) effective in improving home-school points would be in addition to any In evaluating the quality of the communication, student academic points the applicant earns under the services to be provided by the proposed achievement, school academic selection criteria. PIRC, we consider— achievement, and parental involvement Selection Criteria (1) The quality and sufficiency of in school planning, review, and strategies for ensuring equal access by, improvement. We propose that we use the following and treatment of eligible project selection criteria to evaluate participants who are members of groups Eligibility Requirements applications under the PIRC that have been traditionally We propose that organizations seeking competition. The maximum points for underrepresented based on race, color, funding under the PIRC Program, either each criterion is indicated in national origin, gender, age, or individually or in consortia with one or parentheses after the heading for that disability; and more LEAs, be required to demonstrate criterion. (2) The extent to which the proposed that they are nonprofit organizations (a) Need for the project (20) PIRC will— under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal In evaluating the need for the (i) Provide comprehensive training, Revenue Code. proposed project, we consider the extent information, and support services to We also propose, for purposes of the to which— develop and strengthen the relationship PIRC Program, that the term ‘‘nonprofit
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16099
organization’’ not include institutions of National Government and the States, or Dated: March 29, 2002. higher education, State educational on the distribution of power and Susan B. Neuman, agencies, local educational agencies, responsibilities among the various Assistant Secretary for Elementary and intermediate school districts, schools, levels of government. Although we do Secondary Education. government entities, or hospitals. not believe these proposed regulations [FR Doc. 02–8087 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Executive Order 12866 would have federalism implications as BILLING CODE 4000–01–P defined in Executive Order 13132, we This notice has been reviewed in encourage State and local elected accordance with Executive Order 12866. officials to review them and to provide DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Under the terms of the order, we have comments. assessed the potential costs and benefits [CFDA No. 84.360] of this regulatory action. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 School Dropout Prevention Program The potential costs associated with the notice are those resulting from This document contains information AGENCY: Department of Education. statutory requirements and those we collection requirements. Under the ACTION: Notice inviting applications for have determined as necessary for Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 new awards for fiscal year (FY) 2002. administering this program effectively U.S.C. 3507(d)), we have submitted a and efficiently. copy of this document and the Purpose of Program: To support In assessing the potential costs and information collection to the Office of effective, sustainable, and coordinated benefits—both quantitative and Management and Budget (OMB) for its school dropout prevention and reentry qualitative—of this notice, we have review. programs in high schools with annual determined that the benefits justify the school dropout rates greater than the If you want to comment on the costs. State average annual school dropout rate We have also determined that this information collection requirements, and in the middle schools that feed regulatory action does not unduly please send your comments to the students into these high schools. interfere with State, local, and tribal Department representative listed under Eligible Applicants: State educational governments in the exercise of their FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. agencies (SEAs) and local educational governmental functions. OMB is required to make a decision agencies (LEAs). concerning the collection of information Applications Available: April 4, 2002. Summary of Potential Costs and Deadline for Transmittal of Benefits in this document between 30 and 60 days after publication in the Federal Applications: May 20, 2002. It is not anticipated that the Register. Therefore, to ensure that OMB Deadline for Intergovernmental requirements proposed in this notice gives your comments full consideration, Review: July 18, 2002. will impose any significant costs on Notification of Intent To Apply for it is important that OMB receives the applicants. Since these regulations Funding: We will be able to develop a comments within 30 days of provide a basis for the Secretary to more efficient process for reviewing implement a competitive grant program publication. This does not affect the grant applications if we have a better that would assist grantees to establish deadline for your comments to us on the understanding of the number of entities school-based or school-linked PIRCs, proposed priority, selection criteria, and that intend to apply for funding. the regulations would not impose any eligibility requirements. Therefore, we strongly encourage each unfunded mandates on States or LEAs. Electronic Access to This Document potential applicant to send, by May 6, The benefits of the program are 2002, a notification of its intent to apply described in the General section under You may view this document, as well for funding to the following address: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION in this as all other Department of Education [email protected]. notice. documents published in the Federal The notification of intent to apply for funding is optional and should not Regulatory Flexibility Act Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet include information regarding the The Secretary certifies that the at the following site: www.ed.gov/ proposed application. Eligible requirements in this notice will not legislation/FedRegister. applicants that fail to provide the have a significant economic impact on notification may still submit an a substantial number of small entities. To use PDF you must have Adobe application by the application deadline. The small entities affected would be Acrobat Reader, which is available free Estimated Available Funds: small nonprofit organizations and small at this site. If you have questions about $9,000,000. LEAs. The requirements proposed in using PDF, call the U.S. Government Estimated Annual Range of Awards: this notice are minimal and are Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1– $200,000–$500,000. necessary to ensure effective program 888–293–6498; or in the Washington, Funding of continuation awards after management. They will not have a DC area at (202) 512–1530. the initial year of funding depends on significant economic impact on any Note: The official version of this document future Congressional appropriations for program applicants. is the document published in the Federal the program. The Administration has not requested funding for this program Federalism Register. Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code in its fiscal year 2003 budget proposal. Executive Order 13132 requires us to of Federal Regulations is available on GPO Estimated Number of Awards: 15–20. ensure meaningful and timely input by Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ These estimates are projections for the State and local elected officials in the index.html. guidance of potential applicants. The development of regulatory policies that Department is not bound by any have federalism implications. Program Authority: Subpart 16 of title V of estimates in this notice. ‘‘Federalism implications’’ means the Elementary and Secondary Education Project Period: Up to 36 months. substantial direct effects on the States, Act, as amended by the No Child Left Behind Applicable Regulations: The on the relationship between the Act of 2001 (Pub. L. 107–110). Education Department General
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16100 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking Dated: March 29, 2002. 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 85, Susan B. Neuman, 97, 98, and 99. Some of the procedures in these Assistant Secretary for Elementary and instructions for transmitting Secondary Education. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: applications differ from those EDGAR [FR Doc. 02–8088 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Description of the Program (34 CFR 75.102). Under the BILLING CODE 4000–01–P Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. The School Dropout Prevention 553) the Department generally offers program, authorized under part H of interested parties the opportunity to DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION title I of the Elementary and Secondary comment on proposed regulations. Education Act, as amended, supports However, these amendments make President’s Commission on Excellence effective, sustainable, and coordinated procedural changes only and do not in Special Education; Notice of school dropout prevention and reentry Meeting programs in high schools with annual establish new substantive policy. school dropout rates greater than the Therefore, under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A), the AGENCY: President’s Commission on State average annual school dropout rate Secretary has determined that proposed Excellence in Special Education, and in the middle schools that feed rulemaking is not required. Department of Education. ACTION: Notice of public meeting. students into these high schools. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Each grant recipient must implement Christine Jackson, Office of Elementary SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary dropout prevention and reentry and Secondary Education, U.S. announces a meeting of the President’s strategies that are scientifically based, Department of Education, 400 Maryland Commission on Excellence in Special are sustainable, and have been widely Avenue, SW., Room 2W104, FOB–6, Education (Commission). This notice replicated. These strategies may Washington, DC 20202–6254. also describes the functions of the include— Telephone: (202) 260–2516 or via Commission. Notice of this meeting is (1) Specific strategies for targeted Internet: [email protected]. required under section 10(a)(2) of the purposes, such as— Individuals who use a Federal Advisory Committee Act and is (a) Effective early intervention telecommunications device for the deaf intended to notify the public of their programs designed to identify at-risk (TDD) may call the Federal Information opportunity to attend. students; Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–888–877– DATES: April 9–10, 2002. (b) Effective programs serving at-risk 8339. Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at students, including racial and ethnic Individuals with disabilities may minorities and pregnant and parenting the Hyatt Regency Hotel, 50 Alambra obtain this notice in an alternative Plaza, Coral Gables, Florida. teenagers, designed to prevent these format (e.g., Braille, large print, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: C. students from dropping out of school; audiotape, or computer diskette) on Todd Jones, Executive Director, or Troy and request to the contact person listed in (c) Effective programs to identify R. Justesen, Deputy Executive Director, the preceding paragraph. Please note, at (202) 208–1312. The fax number is youth who have already dropped out of however, that the Department is not able school and encourage them to reenter (202) 208–1593 and e-mail address is to reproduce in an alternative format the [email protected] or via the school and complete their secondary standard forms included in the notice. education; and Commission’s Web site at: http:// www.ed.gov/inits/commissionsboards/ (2) Approaches such as breaking Electronic Access to This Document whspecialeducation/site map.html. larger schools into smaller learning You may view this document, as well SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: communities and other comprehensive The as all other Department of Education reform approaches, creating alternative Commission is established under school programs, and developing clear documents published in the Federal Executive Order 13227 dated October 2, linkages from schools to career skills Register, in text or Adobe Portable 2001. The Commission’s function is to and employment. Document Format (PDF) on the Internet collect information and study issues at the following site: www.ed.gov/ related to Federal, State, and local Applications legislation/FedRegister. special education programs with the goal of recommending policies for We strongly encourage you to submit To use PDF, you must have the Adobe improving the educational performance your application to us electronically. Acrobat Reader, which is available free of students with disabilities. In Submission of an electronic application at this site. If you have questions about furtherance of its duties, the involves the use of the Electronic Grant using PDF, call the U.S. Government Commission shall invite experts and Application System (e-APPLICATION, Printing Office (GPO) at (202) 512–1530 members of the public to provide formerly e-GAPS) portion of the Grant or, (toll free, at 1–888–293–6498), or in information and guidance. The Administration and Payment System the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512– Commission shall prepare and submit a (GAPS). However, you may submit your 1530. report to the President outlining its application in paper format if you The official version of this document findings and recommendations. prefer. is the document published in the Individuals who will need You can access the electronic Federal Register. Free Internet access to accommodations for a disability in order application for the School Dropout the official edition of the Federal to attend the meeting (i.e. interpreting Prevention program at: http://e- Register and the Code of Federal services, assistive listening devices, grants.ed.gov. Regulations is available on GPO Access materials in alternative format) should You may also obtain a copy of the at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ notify Troy R. Justesen, at (202) 219— application package from the contact index.html. 0704, as soon as possible. Sign language person identified under FOR FURTHER interpreter services will be provided at INFORMATION CONTACT. Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6551 et seq. all meetings. The meeting site will be
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16101
accessible to individuals with mobility DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Comments, protests, and interventions impairments, including those who use may be filed electronically via the wheelchairs. Federal Energy Regulatory internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR Commission On Tuesday, April 9th, there will be 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions an opportunity beginning at 7 a.m. for [Docket Nos. ER02–725–000, ER02–725– on the Commission’s web site at the public to register for a public 001] http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm. comment period. The Commission will Linwood A. Watson, Jr., be addressed on options for parental Great Plains Power Inc.; Notice of Issuance of Order Deputy Secretary involvement in special education. There [FR Doc. 02–8129 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] will be question and answer periods for March 29, 2002. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P the commissioners and a guest speaker Great Plains Power Inc. (GPP) presentation. On Wednesday, April 10, submitted for filing a rate schedule the commissioners will continue under which GPP will engage in the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY discussion on the subject of sales of capacity, energy and certain perspectives of parents and educators ancillary services at market-based rates Federal Energy Regulatory serving children with disabilities, a case and for the reassignment of transmission Commission study of the importance of leadership at capacity. GPP also requested waiver of the school-level in serving children at- various Commission regulations. In [Docket Nos. ER02–1213–000] risk of academic failure, and a particular, GPP requested that the continuation of discussion on options Commission grant blanket approval Mirant Energy Trading, L.L.C.; Notice for parental involvement in special under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future of Issuance of Order education. issuances of securities and assumptions March 29, 2002. Records are kept of all Commission of liability by GPP. Mirant Energy Trading, L.L.C. (MET) proceedings, and are available for public On March 27, 2002, pursuant to submitted for filing a rate schedule inspection at President’s Commission delegated authority, the Director, Office under which MET will engage in the on Excellence in Special Education, 80 of Markets, Tariffs and Rates-Central, sales of capacity, energy and certain F Street, NW., Suite 408, Washington, granted requests for blanket approval ancillary services at market-based rates DC 20208 from the hours of 9 a.m. to 5 under Part 34, subject to the following: and for the reassignment of transmission p.m. (EST). This notice will not meet Any person desiring to be heard or to capacity. MET also requested waiver of the 15-day FACA requirement for protest the blanket approval of various Commission regulations. In announcing meetings in the Federal issuances of securities or assumptions of particular, MET requested that the Register however a previous notice was liability by GPP should file a motion to Commission grant blanket approval printed indicating the date of the intervene or protest with the Federal under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future upcoming meeting. The notice gives the Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 issuances of securities and assumptions public more information about the First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, of liability by MET. agenda and actual location of the in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 meeting that was not available at the of the Commission’s Rules of Practice On March 28, 2002, pursuant to first printing. and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and delegated authority, the Director, Office 385.214). of Markets, Tariffs and Rates-Central, Electronic Access to This Document Absent a request to be heard in granted requests for blanket approval opposition within this period, GPP is under Part 34, subject to the following: You may view this document, as well authorized to issue securities and Any person desiring to be heard or to as all other Department if Education assume obligations or liabilities as a protest the blanket approval of documents published in the Federal guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise issuances of securities or assumptions of Register, in text or Adobe Portable in respect of any security of another liability by MET should file a motion to Document Format (PDF) on the Internet person; provided that such issuance or intervene or protest with the Federal at the following site: www.ed.gov/ assumption is for some lawful object Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 legislation/FedRegister. within the corporate purposes of GPP, First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, To use PDF you must have Adobe compatible with the public interest, and in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 Acrobat Reader, which is available free is reasonably necessary or appropriate of the Commission’s Rules of Practice at this site. If you have questions about for such purposes. and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and using PDF, call the U.S. Government The Commission reserves the right to 385.214). Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1– require a further showing that neither Absent a request to be heard in 888–293–6498; or in the Washington, public nor private interests will be opposition within this period, MET is DC, area at (202) 512–1530. adversely affected by continued authorized to issue securities and Note: The official version of this document approval of GPP’s issuances of securities assume obligations or liabilities as a is the document published in the Federal or assumptions of liability. guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise Register. Free Internet access to the official Notice is hereby given that the in respect of any security of another edition of the Federal Register and the Code deadline for filing motions to intervene person; provided that such issuance or of Federal Regulations is available on GPO or protests, as set forth above, is April assumption is for some lawful object Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ 26, 2002. within the corporate purposes of MET, index.html. Copies of the full text of the Order are compatible with the public interest, and available from the Commission’s Public is reasonably necessary or appropriate Robert H. Pasternack, Reference Branch, 888 First Street, NE., for such purposes. Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Washington, DC 20426. The Order may The Commission reserves the right to Rehabilitative Service. also be viewed on the Internet at require a further showing that neither [FR Doc. 02–8114 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm public nor private interests will be BILLING CODE 4000–01–M (call 202–208–2222 for assistance). adversely affected by continued
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16102 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
approval of MET’s issuances of the Federal Power Act for a transaction Comment Date: April 16, 2002. securities or assumptions of liability. of a disposition of jurisdictional 7. Duke Electric Transmission Notice is hereby given that the facilities whereby MPI would transfer deadline for filing motions to intervene all of the membership interests it holds [Docket No. ER02–1385–000] or protests, as set forth above, is April in PEP to PEH through an Equity Take notice that on March 26, 2002, 29, 2002. Purchase Agreement. Duke Electric Transmission (Duke), a Copies of the full text of the Order are Comment Date: April 16, 2002. division of Duke Energy Corporation, available from the Commission’s Public 3. Central Main Power Company tendered for filing with the Federal Reference Branch, 888 First Street, NE., Energy Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20426. The Order may [Docket No. ER01–2032–002] (Commission) a Service Agreement with also be viewed on the Internet at Take notice that on March 18, 2002, Duke Power, for Firm Transmission http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm Central Main Power Company (CMP) Service under Duke’s Open Access (call 202–208–2222 for assistance). filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Transmission Tariff. Comments, protests, and interventions Commission (Commission) a Duke requests that the proposed may be filed electronically via the compliance report describing the Service Agreement be permitted to internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR settlement agreement between CMP and become effective on April 1, 2002. Duke 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions Calpine Construction Finance Company, states that this filing is in accordance on the Commission’s web site at L.P., that resolved all disputed issued. with Part 35 of the Commission’s http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm. Comment Date: April 12, 2002. Regulations, 18 CFR Pt. 35, and that a Linwood A. Watson, Jr., 4. International Transmission Company copy has been served on the North Carolina Utilities Commission. Deputy Secretary. [Docket No. ER02–1382–000] Comment Date: April 16, 2002. [FR Doc. 02–8130 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Take notice that on March 26, 2002, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P International Transmission Company 8. Duke Electric Transmission (International Transmission) tendered [Docket No. ER02–1386–000] for filing pursuant to Section 205 of the Take notice that on March 26, 2002, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Power Act, certain late-filed Duke Electric Transmission (Duke), a transmission service agreements for the division of Duke Energy Corporation, Federal Energy Regulatory provision of network integration tendered for filing with the Federal Commission transmission service under the Joint Energy Regulatory Commission Open Access Transmission Tariff [Docket No. EC02–57–000, et al.] (Commission) a Service Agreement with between International Transmission and Duke Power, for Firm Transmission Public Service Company of New Michigan Electric Transmission Service under Duke’s Open Access Mexico, et al.; Electric Rate and Company to the following customers: Transmission Tariff. Corporate Regulation Filings University of Michigan and Engage Duke requests that the proposed Energy America LLC. March 28, 2002. Comment Date: April 16, 2002. Service Agreement be permitted to Take notice that the following filings become effective on April 1, 2002. Duke have been made with the Commission. 5. Southern California Edison Company states that this filing is in accordance Any comments should be submitted in [Docket No. ER02–1383–000] with Part 35 of the Commission’s accordance with Standard Paragraph E Take notice that on March 26, 2002, Regulations, 18 CFR 35, and that a copy at the end of this notice. Southern California Edison Company has been served on the North Carolina (SCE) tendered for filing a Letter Utilities Commission. 1. Public Service Company of New Comment Date: April 16, 2002. Mexico Agreement between SCE and Whitewater Energy Corporation 9. Entergy Services, Inc. [Docket No. EC02–57–000] (Whitewater). The Letter Agreement Take notice that on March 25, 2002, specifies the terms and conditions [Docket No. ER02–1387–000] Public Service Company of New Mexico under which SCE will begin Take notice that on March 26, 2002, (PNM) submitted for filing an construction of the interconnection Entergy Services, Inc., on behalf of application under section 203 of the facilities necessary to interconnect the Entergy Louisiana, Inc., tendered for Federal Power Act for approval of the Whitewater project to SCE’s distribution filing an unexecuted Interconnection disposition to Navopache Electric system. and Operating Agreement with St. Cooperative, Inc. (Navopache) of PNM’s Copies of this filing were served upon Charles Development Company, L.L.C. interest in the Coronado Generating the Public Utilities Commission of the (Enron St. Charles), and a Generator Station Switchyard 500/69 kV State of California and Whitewater. Imbalance Agreement with Enron St. transformer, substation equipment, and Comment Date: April 16, 2002. Charles. associated communications equipment. Comment Date: April 16, 2002. 6. Puget Sound Energy, Inc. Comment Date: April 15, 2002. 10. Xcel Energy Services, Inc. [Docket No. ER02–1384–000] 2. Perryville Energy Partners, L.L.C. Take notice that on March 26, 2002, [Docket No. ER02–1388–000] [Docket No. EC02–58–000] Puget Sound Energy, Inc., as Take notice that on March 26, 2002, Take notice that on March 26, 2002, Transmission Provider, tendered for Xcel Energy Services, Inc. (XE’’), on Perryville Energy Partners, L.L.C. (PEP), filing a service agreement for Firm behalf of Northern States Power (on behalf of Perryville Energy Holdings Point-To-Point Transmission Service Company (Minnesota) (hereinafter NSP), LLC (‘‘PEH’’) and Cleco Midstream and a service agreement for Non-Firm submitted for filing a Second Revision Resources LLC (Midstream) and Mirant Point-To-Point Transmission Service to the Service Schedule A to the Perryville Investments, Inc. (‘‘MPI’’) with RWE Trading Americas Inc. (RWE), Municipal Interconnection and filed with the Commission an as Transmission Customer. A copy of Interchange Agreement between NSP Application pursuant to Section 203 of the filing was served upon RWE. and they City of Melrose.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16103
XES requests that this agreement Commission and are available for public and interconnect facility northeast of become effective on January 1, 2002. inspection. This filing may also be Cheshire, Connecticut by Algonquin; Comment Date: April 16, 2002. viewed on the web at http:// • Retest and upgrade along the C–1 www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, and C–lL lines of about 27.4 miles of 11. Xcel Energy Services, Inc. select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the existing Algonquin mainline from [Docket No. ER02–1389–000] instructions (call 202–208–2222 for Cheshire Compressor Station to North Take notice that on March 26, 2002, assistance). Comments, protests and Haven, Connecticut; Xcel Energy Services, Inc. (XES), on interventions may be filed electronically • An anomaly investigation along the behalf of Northern States Power via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 C–1 lines of about 0.1 mile of existing Company (Minnesota) (hereinafter NSP), CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Algonquin mainline from Cheshire submitted for filing a Second Revision instructions on the Commission’s web Compressor Station to North Haven, to the Service Schedule A to the site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Connecticut; • Municipal Interconnection and Linwood A. Watson, Jr., About 44.8 miles of new 24-inch- Interchange Agreement between NSP diameter Islander East Pipeline from the Deputy Secretary. and they City of Fairfax. North Haven Meter Station just south of XES requests that this agreement [FR Doc. 02–8112 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] North Haven, Connecticut; become effective on January 1, 2002. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P • About 5.6 miles of new 24-inch Comment Date: April 16, 2002. diameter pipeline (the Calverton Lateral) from the Islander East Pipeline 12. Xcel Energy Services, Inc. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY near Wading River, New York, through [Docket No. ER02–1390–000] Federal Energy Regulatory the Towns of Brookhaven and Take notice that on March 26, 2002, Commission Riverhead, New York to a planned Xcel Energy Services, Inc. (XES), on power plant in Calverton, New York; behalf of Northern States Power • A new meter station within the [Docket Nos. CP01–384–000 and CP01–387– Company (Minnesota) (hereinafter NSP), 000] North Haven Meter Station Site, just submitted for filing a Second Revision south of North Haven, Connecticut; to the Service Schedule A to the Islander East Pipeline Company, • A new meter station in Brookhaven, Municipal Interconnection and L.L.C., Algonquin Gas Transmission New York and in Calverton, New York Interchange Agreement between NSP Company; Notice of Availability of the at the terminus of the Islander East and they City of Sioux Falls. Draft Environmental Impact Statement Pipeline and the Calverton Lateral, XES requests that this agreement for the Proposed Islander East Pipeline respectively; and become effective on January 1, 2002. Project • Five new mainline valves along the Comment Date: April 16, 2002. proposed pipeline route (two in March 29, 2002. Connecticut and three in New York). 13. Southwest Power Pool, Inc. The staff of the Federal Energy The purpose of the Islander East [Docket No. ER02–1391–000] Regulatory Commission (FERC or Pipeline Project is to provide Take notice that on March 26, 2002, Commission) has prepared a Draft transportation service for 285,000 Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP) Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) dekatherms per day of natural gas from submitted for filing an executed service on the natural gas pipeline facilities supply areas in the northeast United agreement for Firm Point-to-Point proposed by Islander East Pipeline States to energy markets in Connecticut; Transmission Service with Western Company, L.L.C. (Islander East) and by and Long Island and New York City, Resources d.b.a. Westar Energy Algonquin Gas Transmission Company New York. (Algonquin) in the above-referenced (Transmission Customer). Specific Comment Request SPP seeks an effective date of March dockets. 1, 2002 for this service agreement. The The DEIS was prepared to satisfy the Area residents, local or state Transmission Customer was served with requirements of the National governments, intervenors, and other a copy of this filing. Environmental Policy Act. The staff interested parties are asked to provide Comment Date: April 16, 2002. concludes that approval of the proposed specific comments on whether the project with the appropriate mitigating following alternatives and variations are Standard Paragraph measures as recommended, would have reasonable and practicable and E. Any person desiring to be heard or limited adverse environmental impact. environmentally preferable to the to protest such filing should file a The DEIS also evaluates alternatives to proposed facilities. Comments should motion to intervene or protest with the the proposal, including system also address any effect on project timing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, alternatives, major route alternatives, and related cost/benefits. The staff has 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC and route variations, and requests identified and evaluated the details of 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 comments on them. the following system alternatives: and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of The DEIS addresses the potential • The One-Pipe System Alternative, Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 environmental effects of the which combines the volumes for both and 385.214). All such motions or construction and operation of the the Islander East Project and the protests should be filed on or before the following facilities in New Haven Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P. comment date. Protests will be County, Connecticut and Suffolk (Iroquois) Eastern Long Island (ELI) considered by the Commission in County, New York: Extension Project (CP02–52–000), in one determining the appropriate action to be • A new 12,028 horsepower Cheshire pipeline. This would be an alternative taken, but will not serve to make Compressor Station north of Cheshire, to building both the ELI Extension protestants parties to the proceeding. Connecticut in New Haven County Project and the Islander East Project, Any person wishing to become a party operated by Algonquin; using the route for the ELI Extension must file a motion to intervene. Copies • The removal of two launchers from Project with additional modifications. of this filing are on file with the an existing Algonquin mainline valve This alternative would transport the
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16104 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
total volume of gas proposed in both meeting in Connecticut, and one in New CIPS helpline can be reached at (202) projects, about 435,000 Mcf per day; York, to receive comments on the DEIS. 208–2222. • The ELI System Alternative, which After these comments are reviewed, Linwood A. Watson, Jr., could use the ELI Extension Project any significant new issues are Deputy Secretary. instead of the Islander East Project to investigated, and modifications are deliver 260,000 Mcf per day, in the made to the DEIS, a Final [FR Doc. 02–8128 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] event that the Commission decides that Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) BILLING CODE 6717–01–P there is a market for only one pipeline will be published and distributed by the to serve eastern Long Island; and staff. The FEIS will contain the staff’s DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY • The Long Island System responses to timely comments filed on Alternative, which combines both the DEIS. Federal Energy Regulatory Islander East and the ELI Extension Comments will be considered by the Commission projects in a joint pipeline on Long Commission but will not serve to make Island only. the commentor a party to the Notice of Scoping Meeting and The staff has also examined eight proceeding. Any person seeking to Soliciting Scoping Comments for an route alternatives and nine other route become a party to the proceeding must Applicant Prepared Environmental variations to the proposed facilities. The file a motion to intervene pursuant to Assessment Using the Alternative staff has recommended the use of two of Rule 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Licensing Process the route variations to minimize impacts Practice and Procedures (18 CFR on Branford Land Trust property in 385.214). March 29, 2002. Connecticut and Core Preservation Anyone may intervene in this a. Type of Application: Alternative Areas of the Central Pine Barrens in proceeding based on this DEIS. You Licensing Process. New York. See section 4 of the DEIS for must file your request to intervene as b. Project No.: 11894–001. c. Applicant: Rugraw, Inc. details on alternatives. specified above.1 You do not need d. Name of Project: Lassen Lodge. Comment Procedures and Public intervenor status to have your e. Location: The proposed Lassen Meeting comments considered. Lodge Hydroelectric Project (Project) is Any person wishing to comment on The DEIS has been placed in the located entirely on the South Fork of the DEIS may do so. To ensure public files of the FERC and is available Battle Creek in Tehama County, consideration prior to a Commission for distribution and public inspection California. No Federal lands would be decision on the proposal, it is important at: Federal Energy Regulatory affected. that we receive your comments before Commission, Public Reference and Files f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power the date specified below. Please Maintenance Branch, 888 First Street, Act, 16 USC §§ 791(a)–825(r). carefully follow these instructions to NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, g. Applicant Contact: Art Hagood, ensure that your comments are received (202) 208–1371. Project Manager, Synergics Energy in time and properly recorded: A limited number of copies are Services, 191 Main Street Annapolis, • Send an original and two copies of available from the Public Reference and MD 21043; (410) 268–8820; your comments to: Magalie R. Salas, Files Maintenance Branch identified [email protected]. Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory above. In addition, copies of the DEIS h. FERC Contact: Kenneth Hogan at Commission, 888 First St., NE., Room have been mailed to Federal, state and (202) 208–0434 or via e-mail at: 1A, Washington, DC 20426; local agencies, public interest groups, [email protected]. • Label one copy of the comments for individuals who have requested the j. Deadline for filing scoping the attention of Gas Branch 2, PJ11.2 DEIS, newspapers, and parties to this comments: May 28, 2002. • Reference Docket Nos. CP01–384– proceeding. All documents (original and eight 000 and CP01–387–000; and Additional information about the copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. • Mail your comments so that they proposed project is available from the Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy will be received in Washington, DC on Commission’s Office of External Affairs, Regulatory Commission, 888 First or before May 19, 2002. at (202) 208–1088 or on the FERC Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please note that we are continuing to Internet website (www.ferc.gov) using The Commission’s Rules of Practice experience delays in mail deliveries the ‘‘RIMS’’ link to information in this and Procedure require all interveners from the U.S. Postal Service. As a result, docket number. Click on the ‘‘RIMS’’ filing documents with the Commission we will include all comments that we link, select ‘‘Docket #’’ from the RIMS to serve a copy of that document on receive within a reasonable time frame Menu, and follow the instructions. For each person on the official service list in our environmental analysis of this assistance with access to RIMS, the for the project. Further, if an intervener project. However, the Commission RIMS helpline can be reached at (202) files comments or documents with the encourages electronic filing of any 208–2222. Commission relating to the merits of an comments or interventions or protests to Similarly, the ‘‘CIPS’’ link on the issue that may affect the responsibilities this proceeding. See 18 CFR FERC Internet website provides access of a particular resource agency, they 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions to the texts of formal documents issued must also serve a copy of the document on the Commission’s web site at by the Commission, such as orders, on that resource agency. http://www.ferc.gov under the ‘‘e- notices, and rulemakings. From the Scoping comments may be filed Filing’’ link and the link to the User’s FERC Internet website, click on the electronically via the Internet in lieu of Guide. Before you can file comments ‘‘CIPS’’ link, select ‘‘Docket #’’ from the paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) you will need to create a free account CIPS menu, and follow the instructions. and the instructions on the which can be created by clicking on For assistance with access to CIPS, the Commission’s web site (http:// ‘‘Login to File’’ and then ‘‘New User www.ferc.gov) under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Account.’’ 1 Interventions may also be filed electronically via k. The structures proposed for the We will announce in a future notice, the Internet in lieu of paper. See the previous Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric Project are: the location and time of one local public discussion on filing comments electronically. (1) a new 5-foot-high, 80-foot-long
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16105
reinforced concrete diversion structure; mailed in March 2002, outlining the of exempt and prohibited off-the-record (2) a half-acre reservoir with an subject areas to be addressed in the communications. operating surface elevation of 4,310 feet APEA to the parties on the mailing list. Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, mean sea level (msl); (4) an intake Copies of the SD1 also will be available September 22, 1999) requires structure located at the diversion dam to at the scoping meetings. SD1 may also Commission decisional employees, who include trash racks, fish screens, and be viewed on the web at http:// make or receive an exempt or a fish passage facilities; (5) a 19,200-foot- www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link— prohibited off-the-record long burried penstock composed of a 42- select ‘‘Docket #’’ and follow the inch-diameter, 7,200-foot-long, instructions (call 202–208–2222 for communication relevant to the merits of polyethylene section, and a 36 inch assistance). a contested on-the-record proceeding, to diameter, 12,000-foot-long steel section; Based on all written comments deliver a copy of the communication, if (6) a powerhouse with an installed received, a Scoping Document 2 (SD2) written, or a summary of the substance generating capacity of approximately 7 may be issued. SD2 will include a of any oral communication, to the megawatts and a maximum hydraulic revised list of issues, based on the Secretary. capacity of 100 cfs; (7) a 10-mile-long scoping sessions. Prohibited communications will be 60-kilovolt transmission line; and (8) a Objectives included in a public, non-decisional file 55-foot-long reinforced concrete, box associated with, but not part of, the culvert tailrace discharge structure. At the scoping meetings, Rugraw and decisional record of the proceeding. l. Scoping Process: Rugraw Inc. the Commission staff will: (1) Unless the Commission determines that (Rugraw) intends to utilize the Federal summarize the environmental issues the prohibited communication and any Energy Regulatory Commission’s tentatively identified for analysis in the responses thereto should become part of (Commission) alternative licensing APEA; (2) solicit from the meeting process (ALP). Under the ALP, Rugraw participants all available information, the decisional record, the prohibited off- will prepare an Applicant Prepared especially quantifiable data, on the the-record communication will not be Environmental Assessment (APEA) and resources at issue; (3) encourage considered by the Commission in license application for the Lassen Lodge statements from experts and the public reaching its decision. Parties to a Hydroelectric Project. on issues that should be analyzed in the proceeding may seek the opportunity to Rugraw expects to file with the APEA, including viewpoints in respond to any facts or contentions Commission, the APEA and the license opposition to, or in support of, the made in a prohibited off-the-record application for the project by October staff’s preliminary views; (4) determine communication, and may request that 2003. the resource issues to be addressed in the Commission place the prohibited The purpose of this notice is to inform the APEA; and (5) identify those issues communication and responses thereto you of the opportunity to participate in that require a detailed analysis, as well in the decisional record. The the upcoming scoping meetings as those issues that do not require a Commission will grant such requests identified below, and to solicit your detailed analysis. only when it determines that fairness so scoping comments. Procedures requires. Any person identified below as Scoping Meetings having made a prohibited off-the-record The meetings will be recorded and Rugraw and the Commission staff will communication should serve the will become part of the formal record of document on all parties listed on the hold two scoping meetings, one in the the Commission proceeding on the daytime and one in the evening, to help official service list for the applicable project. proceeding in accordance with Rule us identify the scope of issues to be Individuals, organizations, and 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010. addressed in the APEA. agencies with environmental expertise The daytime scoping meeting will and concerns are encouraged to attend Exempt off-the-record focus on resource agency concerns, the meetings and to assist Rugraw in communications will be included in the while the evening scoping meeting is defining and clarifying the issues to be decisional record of the proceeding, primarily for public input. All addressed in the APEA. unless the communication was with a interested individuals, organizations, cooperating agency as described by 40 and agencies are invited to attend one Linwood A. Watson, Jr., CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR or both of the meetings, and to assist the Deputy Secretary. 385.2201(e)(1)(v). staff in identifying the environmental [FR Doc. 02–8131 Filed 4–4–02; 8:45 am] issues that should be analyzed in the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P The following is a list of exempt and APEA. The times and locations of these prohibited off-the-record meetings are as follows: communications received in the Office Daytime Meeting: Thursday, April 25, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY of the Secretary within the preceding 14 2002, 2 p.m. until concluded, Red Bluff days. Copies of this filing are on file Community Center 1500 South Jackson Federal Energy Regulatory with the Commission and are available Road, Red Bluff, CA 96080. Commission for public inspection. The documents Evening Meeting: Thursday, April 25, [Docket No. RM98–1–000] may be viewed on the web at http:// 2002, 6 p.m. until concluded, Red Bluff www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘RIMS’’ link, Community Center 1500 South Jackson Regulations Governing Off-the-Record select ‘‘Docket#’’ and follow the Road, Red Bluff, CA 96080. Communications; Public Notice instructions (call 202–208–2222 for To help focus discussions, Scoping assistance). Document 1, prepared by Rugraw in March 29, 2002. coordination with the California State This constitutes notice, in accordance Water Resources Control Board, was with 18 CFR 385.2201(h), of the receipt
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16106 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
Docket No. Date filed Presenter or requester
1. Docket No. RM01–12–000, RT01–2–000, et al ...... 03–13–02 Commission.1 2. Docket No. RM01–12–000, RT01–2–000, et al ...... 03–13–02 Commission.2 3. Docket No.RM01–12–000, RT01–2–000, et al ...... 03–15–02 Commission.3 4. Docket No. RM01–12–000, RT01–2–000, et al ...... 03–15–02 Commission.4 5. Docket No. CP02–45–000 ...... 03–25–02 Terry Doyle. 6. Project No. 2342–011 ...... 03–27–02 Gloria Young Hartman. 7. Project No. 1354–000 ...... 03–28–02 Van Button. 1 Transcript of Midwest State Commissioners Regional Teleconference on Electricity Market Design and Structure convened 3/13/02 pursuant to the Commission’s Notice issued 3/1/02 in Docket Nos. RM01–12–000, et al 2 Transcript of Southeast State Commissioners Regional Teleconference convened 3/13/02 pursuant to the Commission’s Notice issued 3/1/02 in Docket Nos. RM01–12–000, et al 3 Transcript of Western State Commissioners Regional Teleconference convened 3/15/02 pursuant to the Commission’s Notice issued 3/1/02 in Docket Nos. RM01–12–000, et al 4 Transcript of the Northeast State Commissioners Regional Teleconference convened 3/15/02 pursuant to the Commission’s Notice issued 3/ 1/02 in Docket Nos. RM01–12–000, et al
Linwood A. Watson, Jr., all federally recognized Native Islands, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Deputy Secretary. American tribes. Since other entities any territory or possession of the United [FR Doc. 02–8132 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] may also be interested, the Agency has States, any agency or instrumentality of BILLING CODE 6717–01–P not attempted to describe all the specific a State including State universities, and entities that may be affected by this all federally recognized Native action. American Tribes. The term ‘‘State’’ in ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION If you have any questions regarding this notice refers to all eligible AGENCY the applicability of this action to a applicants. particular entity, consult your EPA Local governments, private [OPP–00765; FRL–6830–8] Regional PESP Coordinator listed under universities, private nonprofit entities, Unit V. Notice of Availability of Regional private businesses, and individuals are Pesticide Environmental Stewardship B. How Can I Get Additional not eligible. EPA encourages Program (PESP) Grants Information, Including Copies of this organizations excluded from applying Document and Other Related directly are encouraged to work with AGENCY: Environmental Protection Documents? eligible applicants in developing Agency (EPA). 1. Electronically. You may obtain proposals that include them as ACTION: Notice. electronic copies of this document from participants in the projects. Contact the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// your EPA Regional PESP Coordinator SUMMARY: EPA is announcing the www.epa.gov/. To access this for assistance in identifying and availability of approximately $497 document, on the Home Page select contacting eligible applicants. thousand in fiscal year 2002 grant/ ‘‘Laws and Regulations,’’ ‘‘Regulations cooperative agreement funds under IV. Activities and Criteria and Proposed Rules,’’ and then look up section 20 of the Federal Insecticide, the entry for this document under the A. Activities Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) ‘‘Federal Register—Environmental as amended. This funding is for grants The goal of PESP is to reduce the risks Documents.’’ You can also go directly to to States and federally recognized associated with pesticide use in the Federal Register listings at http:// Native American Tribes for research, agricultural and non-agricultural www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. Additional public education, training, monitoring, settings in the United States. The information is available on EPA’s PESP demonstrations, and studies that purpose of the grant program is to website at http://www.epa.gov/ support projects that address this goal. advance pesticide risk reduction. _ oppbppd1/PESP/regional grants.htm. Pesticide pollution prevention, DATES: Applications must be received 2. By mail or in person. Contact your by the appropriate EPA Regional Office integrated pest management (IPM), IPM EPA Regional PESP Coordinator listed in schools, children’s health issues May 27, 2002. EPA will make its award under Unit V. decisions by July 10, 2002. related to pesticides, and those research II. Availability of FY’02 Funds methods for documenting IPM adoption FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: or the reduction of risks associated with Your EPA Regional PESP Coordinator With this publication, EPA is announcing the availability of changes in pesticide use will receive listed under Unit V. priority consideration. Other projects SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: approximately $497 thousand in grant/ cooperative agreement funds for FY’02. will be considered as they complement I. General Information The Agency has delegated grant making these goals through public education, authority to the EPA Regional Offices. training, monitoring, demonstrations, A. Does this Action Apply to Me? and other activities. This action is directed to the public III. Eligible Applicants EPA specifically seeks to build State in general but will be of particular In accordance with the Act, ‘‘. . . and local IPM capacities or to evaluate interest to eligible applicants who Federal agencies, universities, or others the economic feasibility of new IPM include the 50 States, District of as may be necessary to carry out the approaches at the state level (i.e., Columbia, U.S. Virgin Islands, purposes of the act, . . .’’ are eligible to innovative approaches and Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, any receive funding. Restrictions on the methodologies that use application or territory or possession of the United funds appropriated for this program other strategies to reduce the risks States, any agency or instrumentality of limit the eligible applicants to the 50 associated with pesticide use). State a State including State universities, and States, District of Columbia, U.S. Virgin projects might focus on, for example:
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16107
• Researching the effectiveness of • Does the applicant identify the Region VIII (Colorado, Montana, North multimedia communication activities method that will be used to measure Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming) for, including but not limited to: and document the results quantitatively Peg Perreault, 999 18th St., Suite 300, Promoting local IPM activities, and qualitatively? (8P-P3T), Denver, CO 80202–2466. providing technical assistance to 4. Likelihood the project can be Telephone: (303) 312–6286, e-mail: pesticide users; collecting and analyzing replicated to benefit other communities [email protected]. data to target outreach and technical or the product may have broad utility to Region IX (Arizona, California, Hawaii, assistance opportunities; developing a widespread audience. Can this project, Nevada, American Samoa, Guam) taking into account typical staff and measures to determine and document Paul Feder, 75 Hawthorne St (CMD-1), financial restraints, be replicated by progress in pollution prevention; and San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: similar organizations in different identifying regulatory and non- (415) 947–4160, e-mail: locations to address the same or similar regulatory barriers or incentives to [email protected]. pollution prevention. problem? • Region X (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Researching methods for C. Program Management Washington) establishing IPM as an environmental Karl Arne, 1200 6th Ave (ECO-084), management priority, establishing The awarding of FY’02 funds will be Seattle, WA 98101. Telephone: (206) prevention goals, developing strategies managed through the EPA Regional 553–2576, e-mail: [email protected]. to meet those goals, and integrating the Offices. Quality Assurance/Quality Control plans may be required, ethic within both governmental and List of Subjects depending on the nature of the project non-governmental institutions of the and the data collected. Contact your Environmental protection, Pesticides. State or region. Regional PESP Coordinator for more • Initiating research or other information about this requirement. Dated: March 28, 2002. projects that test and support: Janet L. Andersen, V. Regional PESP Coordinators innovative techniques for reducing Director, Biopesticides and Pollution pesticide risk or using pesticides in a Region I (Connecticut, Massachusetts, Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide way to reduce risk, and innovative Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Programs. application techniques to reduce worker Vermont) [FR Doc. 02–8156 Filed 4–3–02 8:45 am] and environmental exposure. Andrea Szylvian, 1 Congress St., Suite BILLING CODE 6560–50–S A list of projects funded since FY 1100 (CPT), Boston, MA 02114–2023. 1998 may be obtained at http:// Telephone: (617) 918–1198, e-mail: www.epa.gov/oppbppd1/PESP/ [email protected]. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION regional_grants.htm or from your Region II (New York, New Jersey, Puerto AGENCY Regional PESP Coordinator. Rico, Virgin Islands) Tara Masters, Raritan Depot, 2890 [OPPTS–51985; FRL–6830–4] B. Criteria Woodbridge Ave (MS-500), Edison, NJ EPA Regional Offices are responsible 08837–3679. Telephone: (732) 906– Certain New Chemicals; Receipt and for the solicitation, screening, and 6183, e-mail: [email protected]. Status Information selection of proposals for funding a Region III (Delaware, Maryland, generic request for proposal will be Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, AGENCY: Environmental Protection available on EPA’s website on or before District of Columbia) Agency (EPA). Fatima El-Abdaoui, 1650 Arch St. April 11, 2002 at http://www.epa.gov/ ACTION: Notice. oppbppd1/PESP/regional_grants.htm. (3WC32), Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029. Interested applicants must contact the Telephone: (215) 814–2129, e-mail: el- SUMMARY: Section 5 of the Toxic appropriate EPA Regional PESP [email protected]. Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires Coordinator to obtain specific Region IV (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, any person who intends to manufacture instructions, Regional criteria, guidance, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, (defined by statute to include import) a and format for submitting proposals. South Carolina, Tennessee) new chemical (i.e., a chemical not on Troy Pierce, 61 Forsyth St SW, Proposals will be evaluated based on the the TSCA Inventory) to notify EPA and Atlanta, GA 30303–8960. Telephone: following criteria: comply with the statutory provisions (404) 562–9016, e-mail: 1. Qualifications and experience of pertaining to the manufacture of new the applicant relative to the proposed [email protected]. Region V (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, chemicals. Under sections 5(d)(2) and project. 5(d)(3) of TSCA, EPA is required to • Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin) Does the applicant demonstrate Heather McDonald, 77 W Jackson publish a notice of receipt of a experience in the field of the proposed Blvd (DT-8J), Chicago, IL 60604-3507. premanufacture notice (PMN) or an activity? application for a test marketing • Telephone: (312) 886–3572, e-mail: Does the applicant have the [email protected]. exemption (TME), and to publish properly trained staff, facilities, or Region VI (Arkansas, Louisiana, New periodic status reports on the chemicals infrastructure in place to conduct the Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas) under review and the receipt of notices project? Jerry Collins, 1445 Ross Ave., Suite of commencement to manufacture those 2. Consistency of proposal with the 1200 (6PD-P), Dallas, TX 75202-2733. chemicals. This status report, which risk reduction goals of PESP. Telephone: (214) 665-7562, e-mail: covers the period from February 14, 3. Does the project provide for a [email protected]. 2002 to February 28, 2002, consists of quantitative or qualitative evaluation of Region VII (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, the PMNs pending or expired, and the achieving the stated goals. Nebraska) notices of commencement to • Is the project designed in such a Brad Horchem, 901 N 5th St., manufacture a new chemical that the way that it is possible to measure and (WWPDPEST), Kansas City, KS 66101. Agency has received under TSCA document the results quantitatively and Telephone: (913) 551–7137, e-mail: section 5 during this time period. The qualitatively? [email protected]. ‘‘S’’ and ‘‘G’’ that precede the chemical
VerDate 11
names denote whether the chemical information claimed as confidential D. How Should I Handle CBI that I Want idenity is specific or generic. business information (CBI). This official to Submit to the Agency? DATES: Comments identified by the record includes the documents that are Do not submit any information docket control number OPPTS–51985 physically located in the docket, as well electronically that you consider to be and the specific PMN number, must be as the documents that are referenced in CBI. You may claim information that received on or before May 6, 2002. those documents. The public version of you submit to EPA in response to this ADDRESSES: Comments may be the official record does not include any document as CBI by marking any part or submitted by mail, electronically, or in information claimed as CBI. The public all of that information as CBI. person. Please follow the detailed version of the official record, which Information so marked will not be instructions for each method as includes printed, paper versions of any disclosed except in accordance with provided in Unit I. of the electronic comments submitted during procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure an applicable comment period, any test In addition to one complete version of proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative data submitted by the Manufacturer/ the comment that includes any that you identify docket control number Importer is available for inspection in information claimed as CBI, a copy of OPPTS–51985 and the specific PMN the TSCA Nonconfidential Information the comment that does not contain the number in the subject line on the first Center, North East Mall Rm. B– 607, information claimed as CBI must be page of your response. Waterside Mall, 401 M St., SW., submitted for inclusion in the public FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Washington, DC. The Center is open version of the official record. Barbara Cunningham, Acting Director, from noon to 4 p.m., Monday through Information not marked confidential Environmental Assistance Division, Friday, excluding legal holidays. The will be included in the public version Office of Pollution Prevention and telephone number of the Center is (202) of the official record without prior Toxics (7408M), Environmental 260–7099. notice. If you have any questions about Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; C. How and to Whom Do I Submit please consult the person listed under telephone number: (202) 554–1404; e- Comments? FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. mail address: [email protected]. You may submit comments through SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare the mail, in person, or electronically. To My Comments for EPA? I. General Information ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is You may find the following imperative that you identify docket A. Does this Action Apply to Me? suggestions helpful for preparing your control number OPPTS–51985 and the comments: This action is directed to the public specific PMN number in the subject line 1. Explain your views as clearly as in general. As such, the Agency has not on the first page of your response. attempted to describe the specific possible. entities that this action may apply to. 1. By mail. Submit your comments to: 2. Describe any assumptions that you Although others may be affected, this Document Control Office (7407M), used. action applies directly to the submitter Office of Pollution Prevention and 3. Provide copies of any technical of the premanufacture notices addressed Toxics (OPPT), Environmental information and/or data you used that in the action. If you have any questions Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania support your views. regarding the applicability of this action Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. 4. If you estimate potential burden or to a particular entity, consult the person 2. In person or by courier. Deliver costs, explain how you arrived at the listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION your comments to: OPPT Document estimate that you provide. CONTACT. Control Office (DCO) in EPA East 5. Provide specific examples to Building Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution illustrate your concerns. B. How Can I Get Additional 6. Offer alternative ways to improve Information, Including Copies of this Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The DCO is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday the notice or collection activity. Document and Other Related 7. Make sure to submit your Documents? through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the comments by the deadline in this 1. Electronically. You may obtain DCO is (202) 564–8930. document. copies of this document and certain 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, other available documents from the EPA 3. Electronically. You may submit be sure to identify the docket control Internet Home Page at http:// your comments electronically by e-mail number assigned to this action in the www.epa.gov/. On the Home Page select to: ‘‘[email protected],’’ or mail your subject line on the first page of your ‘‘Laws and Regulations’’,’’ Regulations computer disk to the address identified response. You may also provide the and Proposed Rules, and then look up in this unit. Do not submit any name, date, and Federal Register the entry for this document under the information electronically that you citation. ‘‘Federal Register—Environmental consider to be CBI. Electronic comments II. Why is EPA Taking this Action? Documents.’’ You can also go directly to must be submitted as an ASCII file the Federal Register listings at http:// avoiding the use of special characters Section 5 of TSCA requires any www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. and any form of encryption. Comments person who intends to manufacture 2. In person. The Agency has and data will also be accepted on (defined by statute to include import) a established an official record for this standard disks in WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or new chemical (i.e., a chemical not on action under docket control number ASCII file format. All comments in the TSCA Inventory to notify EPA and OPPTS–51985. The official record electronic form must be identified by comply with the statutory provisions consists of the documents specifically docket control number OPPTS–51985 pertaining to the manufacture of new referenced in this action, any public and the specific PMN number. chemicals. Under sections 5(d)(2) and comments received during an applicable Electronic comments may also be filed 5(d)(3) of TSCA, EPA is required to comment period, and other information online at many Federal Depository publish a notice of receipt of a PMN or related to this action, including any Libraries. an application for a TME and to publish
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16109
periodic status reports on the chemicals III. Receipt and Status Report for PMNs whether the chemical idenity is specific under review and the receipt of notices This status report identifies the PMNs or generic. of commencement to manufacture those pending or expired, and the notices of In table I of this unit, EPA provides chemicals. This status report, which commencement to manufacture a new the following information (to the extent covers the period from February 14, chemical that the Agency has received that such information is not claimed as 2002 to February 28, 2002, consists of under TSCA section 5 during this time CBI) on the PMNs received by EPA the PMNs pending or expired, and the period. If you are interested in during this period: the EPA case number notices of commencement to information that is not included in the assigned to the PMN; the date the PMN manufacture a new chemical that the following tables, you may contact EPA was received by EPA; the projected end Agency has received under TSCA as described in Unit II. to access date for EPA’s review of the PMN; the section 5 during this time period. additional non-CBI information that submitting manufacturer; the potential may be available. The ‘‘S’’ and ‘‘G’’ that uses identified by the manufacturer in precede the chemical names denote the PMN; and the chemical identity.
I. 55 PREMANUFACTURE NOTICES RECEIVED FROM: 02/14/02 TO 02/28/02
Projected Case No. Received Notice Manufacturer/Importer Use Chemical Date End Date
P–02–0354 02/14/02 05/15/02 CBI (G) Surfactant (G) Acrylic polymer P–02–0355 02/14/02 05/15/02 CBI (G) Saturation resin for structural (G) Polymer with phenol-bisphenol- composites formaldehyde P–02–0356 02/14/02 05/15/02 CBI (G) Additive for paint (G) Aliphatic benzoate ester P–02–0358 02/14/02 05/15/02 CBI (G) Chain-terminating agent (G) Alkyl xanthate P–02–0359 02/15/02 05/16/02 CIBA Specialty Chemi- (G) Textile dye (G) Substituted pyridine coupled with cals Corporation diazotized substituted nitrobenzonitrile, diazotized sub- stituted benzenamine and sub- stituted pyridinecarbonitrile P–02–0360 02/15/02 05/16/02 AOC L.L.C. (S) Polyester component for sheet (S) Hexanedioic acid (9ci) polymer molding compound for plastic parts; with 2,2-dimethyl-1,3-propanediol, polyester component for bulk mold- 1,2-ethanediol and 2,5-furandione ing compound for plastic parts P–02–0361 02/15/02 05/16/02 The Prince Manufac- (S) Onecoat resin for tpo’s; adhesives (S) 2-propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, poly- turing Company for tpo’s mers with chlorinated maleic anhy- dride-polypropylene reaction prod- ucts, cyclohexyl methacrylate and me methacrylate P–02–0362 02/15/02 05/16/02 CBI (G) Product is a component in a lubri- (G) Mixed alkyl phosphate esters cant blend with final use in the alkoxylated plastics industry P–02–0363 02/19/02 05/20/02 CBI (G) Polymeric chromophore (G) Polyalkoxylated aromatic chromophore P–02–0364 02/19/02 05/20/02 CBI (G) Polymeric chromophore (G) Polyalkoxylated aromatic chromophore P–02–0365 02/19/02 05/20/02 CBI (G) Polymeric chromophore (G) Polyalkoxylated aromatic chromophore P–02–0366 02/19/02 05/20/02 CBI (G) Polymeric chromophore (G) Polyalkoxylated aromatic chromophore P–02–0367 02/19/02 05/20/02 CBI (G) Chemical intermediate (G) Polyalkoxylated phenol derivative P–02–0368 02/19/02 05/20/02 CBI (G) Chemical intermediate (G) Polyalkoxylated phenol derivative P–02–0369 02/19/02 05/20/02 Solutia Inc. (S) Curing resin for industrial coatings (G) Modified epoxy resin P–02–0370 02/19/02 05/20/02 AOC, LLC (S) Polyester component for filament (S) 1,3-benzenedicarboxylic acid (9ci) winding of fiberglass reinforced polymer with 1,4- plastic parts benzenedicarboxylic acid, 2,5- furandione, 2,2’-oxybis(ethanol) and 1,2-propanediol P–02–0371 02/20/02 05/21/02 BASF Corporation (G) Pick-up truck bed liner (G) Ipdi prepolymer P–02–0372 02/20/02 05/21/02 CBI (S) Reactive dyestuff for the color- (G) Bifunctional reactive azo dye ation of cellulosic fiber materials P–02–0373 02/20/02 05/21/02 CBI (G) Open, non dispersive (dye) (G) Anthracene dyestuff P–02–0374 02/20/02 05/21/02 CBI (G) Adhesion promotor (G) Chlorinated polyester P–02–0375 02/20/02 05/21/02 CBI (S) Reactive dyestuff for the color- (G) Bifunctional reactive azo dye ation of cellulosic fiber materials P–02–0376 02/20/02 05/21/02 CBI (G) Lubricant additive (G) Fatty acid ester P–02–0377 02/20/02 05/21/02 H.B. Fuller Company (S) Pleat bonding adhesive for air and (G) Polyamide oil filters; adhesive and coating for textiles P–02–0378 02/20/02 05/21/02 H.B. Fuller Company (S) Pleat bonding adhesives for air (G) Polyamide and oil filters; adhesive and coating for textile
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16110 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
I. 55 PREMANUFACTURE NOTICES RECEIVED FROM: 02/14/02 TO 02/28/02—Continued
Projected Case No. Received Notice Manufacturer/Importer Use Chemical Date End Date
P–02–0379 02/20/02 05/21/02 H.B. Fuller Company (S) Pleat bonding adhesive for air and (G) Polyamide oil filters; adhesives and coating for textiles P–02–0380 02/20/02 05/21/02 H.B. Fuller Company (S) Pleat bonding adhesive for air oil (G) Polyamide filters; adhesive and coating for tex- tiles P–02–0381 02/21/02 05/22/02 Solutia Inc. (S) Curing resin for industrial can (G) Polyester resin coatings P–02–0382 02/21/02 05/22/02 CBI (G) Petroleum lubricant additive (G) Alkylbenzene sulfonate P–02–0383 02/21/02 05/22/02 E.I. Du pont de Ne- (S) Polyurethane monomer; polyester (S) 1,4-cyclododecanediol* mours and Com- monomer; fragrance intermediate pany - Dupont Nylon P–02–0384 02/21/02 05/22/02 E.I. Du pont de Ne- (S) Polyurethane monomer; polyester (S) 1,5-cyclododecanediol mours and Com- monomer; fragrance intermediate pany - Dupont Nylon P–02–0385 02/21/02 05/22/02 E.I. Du pont de Ne- (S) Polyurethane monomer; polyester (S) 1,6-cyclododecanediol mours and Com- monomer; fragrance intermediate pany - Dupont Nylon P–02–0386 02/22/02 05/23/02 CBI (G) Open, non-dispersive use (G) Acrylic polymer P–02–0387 02/22/02 05/23/02 Solutia Inc. (S) Defoamer for waterborne emul- (G) Modified alkyd resin sion paints and adhesives P–02–0388 02/25/02 05/26/02 CBI (S) Intermediate used in the manufac- (G) Arylsulfonium compound ture of photoresist raw materials P–02–0389 02/25/02 05/26/02 CBI (G) An open non-dispersive use (G) Alkyd resin P–02–0390 02/25/02 05/26/02 CBI (G) Softening of cellulose (G) Fatty acid, alkanolamine ester P–02–0391 02/25/02 05/26/02 Specialty Fertilizer (G) Fertilizer dust control coating and (G) Maleic acid salt copolymer Products LLC agronomic enhancement product P–02–0392 02/25/02 05/26/02 Loctite Corporation (S) A component of adhesive formula- (S) Poly[oxy(methyl-1,2- tions for general industrial bonding ethanediyl)],alpha-[[[3- applications (trimethoxysily- l)propyl]amino]carbonyl]-omega- [[[[3- (trimethoxysily- l)propyl]amino]carbonyl]oxy]- P–02–0393 02/25/02 05/26/02 Specialty Fertilizer (G) Intermediate for chemical used as (G) Maleic acid salt copolymer Products LLC fertilizer dust control coating and agronomic enhancement product P–02–0394 02/25/02 05/26/02 CBI (S) Raw material used in a (G) Arylsulfonium compound photoresist formulation P–02–0395 02/26/02 05/27/02 CBI (G) Chemical intermediate (G) Cyclohexene-carboxylic acid, [(di- propenylamino)carbonyl]-,sodium salt, (1r,6r)-rel- P–02–0396 02/25/02 05/26/02 CBI (S) Raw material for use in fra- (G) Aliphatic substituted amide grances for soaps and household personal care products P–02–0397 02/25/02 05/26/02 CBI (S) Siloxane polymer used as an in- (G) Siloxane polymer termediate for another polymer P–02–0398 02/25/02 05/26/02 CBI (S) Siloxane polymer used as a raw (G) Blocked siloxane polymer material in photoresist P–02–0399 02/25/02 05/26/02 CBI (G) Uv/eb curing agent (all cat- (S) Butanedioic acid, (tetrapropenyl)-, egories) mono[2-[(1-oxo-2-pro- penyl)oxy]ethyl]ester P–02–0400 02/25/02 05/26/02 CBI (G) Uv/eb curing agent (all cat- (S) Butanedioic acid, (tetrapropenyl)-, egories) mono[2-[(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-pro- penyl)oxy]ethyl ester P–02–0401 02/25/02 05/26/02 CBI (G) Uv/eb curing agent (all cat- (S) Butanedioic acid, octenyl-, egories) mono[2-[(1-oxo-2-pro- penyl)oxy]ethyl] ester P–02–0402 02/25/02 05/26/02 CBI (G) Uv/eb curing agent (all cat- (S) Butanedioic acid octenyl-, egories) mono[2-[(2-methyl-1-oxo-2-pro- penyl)oxy]ethyl] ester P–02–0403 02/28/02 05/29/02 Hercules incorporated (G) Papermaking chemical (G) Imidazolium salt P–02–0404 02/28/02 05/29/02 CBI (S) Coating for paperboard stock (G) Aliphatic polyester polyurethane with tertiary amine P–02–0405 02/28/02 05/29/02 CBI (G) An open, non-dispersive use (G) Polyester-type polyurethane P–02–0406 02/28/02 05/29/02 CBI (G) Corrosion inhibitor (G) Acetaldehyde based polymer P–02–0407 02/28/02 05/29/02 3m company (S) Cross linker (G) Urethane acrylate P–02–0408 02/28/02 05/29/02 Ciba specialty chemi- (S) Exhaust dyeing of polyester fibers (G) Acetamide, substituted alkylamino cals Corporation, phenyl azo substituted isoindole textile effects
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16111
I. 55 PREMANUFACTURE NOTICES RECEIVED FROM: 02/14/02 TO 02/28/02—Continued
Projected Case No. Received Notice Manufacturer/Importer Use Chemical Date End Date
P–02–0409 02/28/02 05/29/02 Ciba specialty chemi- (S) Exhaust dyeing of polyester fibers (G) Acetamide, substituted cals Corporation, methoxyalkylamino phenyl azo sub- textile effects stituted isoindole
In table II of this unit, EPA provides CBI) on the Notices of Commencement the following information (to the extent to manufacture received: that such information is not claimed as
II. 37 NOTICES OF COMMENCEMENT FROM: 02/14/02 TO 02/28/02
Commencement/ Case No. Received Date Import Date Chemical
P–00–0187 02/28/02 02/21/02 (G) Ethoxyylated phenol, styrenated P–00–0560 02/27/02 01/14/02 (G) Acrylic emulsion polymer P–00–0561 02/27/02 01/14/02 (G) Acrylic emulsion polymer P–00–0562 02/27/02 01/14/02 (G) Acrylic emulsion polymer P–00–0563 02/27/02 01/14/02 (G) Acrylic emulsion polymer P–00–1144 02/27/02 01/16/02 (G) Unsaturated alkyl acid P–01–0254 02/22/02 12/12/01 (G) Epoxy urethane acrylate P–01–0340 02/14/02 01/07/02 (S) 9-octadecenoic acid, 12-(benzoyloxy)-, hexadecyl ester, [r-(z)]- P–01–0479 02/26/02 02/07/02 (G) Dodecyl 4-methoxybenzene derivative P–01–0502 02/22/02 02/11/02 (G) Polyesterimide resin, based on theic P–01–0633 02/27/02 01/27/02 (G) Aliphatic thermoplastic polyurethane P–01–0649 02/28/02 02/17/02 (G) Organometallic complex P–01–0735 02/20/02 01/17/02 (G) Polyamideimide polymer P–01–0758 02/28/02 02/11/02 (G) Organo silane ester P–01–0804 02/14/02 01/12/02 (G) Substituted carbocyle P–01–0834 02/15/02 01/30/02 (G) Aliphatic ester of dicarboxylic acid P–01–0837 02/15/02 02/01/02 (G) Aliphatic ester of dicarboxylic acid P–01–0892 02/27/02 01/08/02 (G) Polymer of substituted aromatic olefins and aliphatic olefins P–01–0914 02/20/02 01/14/02 (G) Acrylic polymer P–01–0915 02/20/02 01/14/02 (G) Acrylic polymer P–01–0916 02/20/02 01/14/02 (G) Acrylic polymer P–01–0917 02/22/02 02/14/02 (G) Methacrylic polymer P–01–0927 02/20/02 01/14/02 (G) Polycarbonate and polyester-type polyurethane P–02–0001 02/19/02 02/05/02 (G) Acrylic polymer on the basis of methyl methacrylate and n-butyl methacry- late P–02–0016 02/26/02 02/07/02 (G) Fluorochemical urethane P–02–0026 02/28/02 01/17/02 (G) Mixed aliphatic substituted bis-p-phenylene diurea P–02–0032 02/21/02 01/29/02 (G) Aromatic thiophene derivative P–02–0044 02/27/02 02/05/02 (G) Copper phthalocyanine derivative P–02–0055 02/15/02 02/12/02 (G) Dioic acid, polymer with (substituted)diol, hydrazine, hydroxypoly[(substituted)diyl], (substituted)propanoic acid and [(sub- stituted)cyclohexane], compd. with (substituted)amine P–02–0096 02/22/02 02/19/02 (G) Acid functional acrylic polymer P–94–1653 02/28/02 02/01/02 (G) Aromatic polyisocyanate P–94–2134 02/27/02 01/18/02 (G) Polyalphaolefins P–96–1704 02/14/02 12/20/01 (S) 8-decene-3, 5-dione,4,6,9-trimethyl- P–98–0781 02/28/02 01/28/02 (G) Fluorinated amine oxide P–98–1067 02/26/02 02/17/02 (G) Acrylated urethane P–99–0407 02/26/02 01/19/02 (G) Polyester acrylate P–99–0676 02/21/02 01/20/02 (G) Ethylene interpolymer
List of Subjects FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION DATE & TIME: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 Environmental protection, Chemicals, at 10 A.M. Premanufacturer notices. Sunshine Act Meeting PLACE: 999 E Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. Dated: March 20, 2002. AGENCY: Federal Election Commission. STATUS: This Meeting Will Be Closed To Mary Louise Hewlett, Previously Announced Date & Time: The Public. Acting Director, Information Management Tuesday, April 9, 2002, Meeting Closed ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. to the Public. This Meeting Has Been Compliance matters pursuant to 2 Rescheduled for Wednesday, April 10, U.S.C. 437 g. [FR Doc. 02–8157 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] 2002. Audits conducted pursuant to 2 BILLING CODE 6560–50–S U.S.C. 437g, 438(b), and Title 26, U.S.C.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16112 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
Matters concerning participation in Bank members in a safe and sound 1. Daniel Enrique Dosoretz, Victor J. civil actions or proceedings or manner. Public testimony at the hearing Dosoretz and Howard Michael arbitration. will be limited to presentations by Bank Sheridan, all of Fort Myers, Florida; to Internal personnel rules and presidents or Bank board of directors acquire additional voting shares of procedures or matters affecting a chairpersons. Testimony prepared by a Edison Bancshares, Inc., Fort Myers, particular employee. Bank for public delivery at the hearing Florida, and thereby indirectly acquire DATE & TIME: Thursday, April 11, 2002 should be submitted in writing to the additional voting shares of Edison at 10 A.M. Finance Board by 2 p.m., Tuesday, April National Bank, Fort Myers, Florida. PLACE: 999 E Street, N.W., Washington, 9, 2002. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve D.C. (Ninth Floor) Other individuals or organizations System, March 29, 2002. interested in commenting on the Banks’ STATUS: This Meeting Will Be Open To Robert deV. Frierson, proposed capital plans may do so by The Public. Deputy Secretary of the Board. submitting their comments in writing to [FR Doc. 02–8096 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: the Finance Board prior to April 11, BILLING CODE 6210–01–S Correction and Approval of Minutes. 2002. Report of the Audit Division on Status: This hearing will be open to McCain 2000, Inc. and McCain 2000 the public. Compliance Committee, Inc. FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Draft Advisory Opinion 2002–03: ADDRESSES: Send testimony and comments to Elaine L. Baker, Secretary Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Green Party of Ohio by Paul Mergers of Bank Holding Companies Dumouchelle, Convener. to the Board, by electronic mail to Rulemaking Plan to Implement the [email protected], or by regular mail to The companies listed in this notice Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of the Federal Housing Finance Board, have applied to the Board for approval, 2002; Revised Regulations Priorities. 1777 F Street, NW., Washington, DC pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Statement of Policy Regarding Party 20006. Comments will be available for Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) Committee Coordinated Expenditures. public inspection at this address. (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part Administrative Matters. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 225), and all other applicable statutes PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION: Elaine L. Baker, Secretary to the Board, and regulations to become a bank Mr. Ron Harris, Press Officer, 202–408–2837 or Thomas D. Casey, holding company and/or to acquire the Telephone: (202) 694–1220. Counsel to the Chairman, 202–408– assets or the ownership of, control of, or 2957. the power to vote shares of a bank or Mary W. Dove, Dated: April 2, 2002. bank holding company and all of the Secretary of the Commission. James L. Bothwell, banks and nonbanking companies [FR Doc. 02–8350 Filed 4–2–02; 3:31 pm] Managing Director. owned by the bank holding company, BILLING CODE 6715–01–M including the companies listed below. [FR Doc. 02–8276 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] The applications listed below, as well BILLING CODE 6725–02–P as other related filings required by the FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARD Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank [No. 2002–N–4] FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM indicated. The application also will be Notice of Public Hearing on Federal available for inspection at the offices of Home Loan Bank Capital Plans Change in Bank Control Notices; the Board of Governors. Interested Acquisition of Shares of Bank or Bank persons may express their views in AGENCY: Federal Housing Finance Holding Companies writing on the standards enumerated in Board. the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the ACTION: Notice of public hearing. The notificants listed below have proposal also involves the acquisition of applied under the Change in Bank a nonbanking company, the review also SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and includes whether the acquisition of the the Federal Housing Finance Board § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 nonbanking company complies with the (Finance Board) will hold the following CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank standards in section 4 of the BHC Act public hearing: holding company. The factors that are (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise Time and Date of Hearing: 2 p.m., considered in acting on the notices are noted, nonbanking activities will be Thursday, April 11, 2002. set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 conducted throughout the United States. Place: Board Room, Second Floor, U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). Additional information on all bank Federal Housing Finance Board, 1777 F The notices are available for holding companies may be obtained Street, NW., Washington, DC 20006. immediate inspection at the Federal from the National Information Center Agenda: Finance Board staff currently Reserve Bank indicated. The notices website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/. is reviewing the proposed capital plans also will be available for inspection at Unless otherwise noted, comments submitted by the Federal Home Loan the office of the Board of Governors. regarding each of these applications Banks (Banks) to the Finance Board for Interested persons may express their must be received at the Reserve Bank approval, pursuant to the requirements views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of of the Gramm-Leach-Blilely Act and the indicated for that notice or to the offices Governors not later than April 29, 2002. Finance Board’s capital regulation. The of the Board of Governors. Comments A. Federal Reserve Bank of San purpose of this hearing is to provide an must be received not later than April 18, Francisco (Maria Villanueva, Consumer opportunity for the Banks that choose to 2002. Regulation Group) 101 Market Street, participate in the hearing to clarify how A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta San Francisco, California 94105–1579: proposed capital plans are consistent (Cynthia C. Goodwin, Vice President) 1. First Financial of Renton, Inc., with the cooperative structure of the 1000 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Renton, Washington, and First Financial Bank System and provide liquidity for Georgia 30309–4470: Holdings, MHC, Renton, Washington; to
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16113
become bank holding companies by been designated the lead for this DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND acquiring 100 percent of the voting activity. HUMAN SERVICES shares of First Savings Bank of Renton, The IACC meeting will be open to the National Institutes of Health Renton, Washington. public, with attendance limited to space Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve available. Individuals who plan to National Institute of Child Health and System, March 29, 2002. attend and need special assistance, such Human Development; Amended Notice Robert deV. Frierson, as sign language interpretation or other of Meeting Deputy Secretary of the Board. reasonable accommodations, should [FR Doc. 02–8097 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] notify the contact person listed below in Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National BILLING CODE 6210–01–S advance of the meeting. Longitudinal Study of Environmental Name of Committee: Interagency Autism Effects on Child Health and Coordinating Committee. Development, April 7, 2002, 11 AM to FEDERAL RETIREMENT THRIFT Date: May 24, 2002. April 8, 2002, 5:30 PM, Sheraton INVESTMENT BOARD Time: 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Premiere Hotel, 8661 Leesburg Pike, Agenda: Discussion of autism activities Sunshine Act Meeting Vienna, VA which was published in the across Federal agencies. Federal Register on March 18, 2002, 67 Place: National Institutes of Health, 9000 TIME AND DATE: 10 a.m. (EDT), April 15, FR 52. Rockville Pike, Building 31, Conference 2002. The meeting will be held April 7, Room 10 (6th floor), Bethesda, Maryland 2002, 3:00 p.m. to April 9, 2002, 5:30 PLACE: 4th Floor, Conference Room 20892. p.m., Sheraton Premiere Hotel, 8661 4506, 1250 H Street, NW., Washington, Contact Person: Steve Foote, Ph.D., Leesburg Pike, Vienna, VA. The meeting DC. Director, Division of Neuroscience & Basic is open to the public. STATUS: Open. Behavioral Science, National Institute of Dated: March 27, 2002. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Mental Health, NIH, 6001 Executive LaVerne Y. Stringfield, 1. Approval of the minutes of the Boulevard, Room 7204, MSC 9645, Bethesda, Maryland 20892. Email: [email protected]. Director, Office of Federal Advisory March 18, 2002, Board member meeting. Committee Policy. 2. Thrift Savings Plan activity report Phone: 301-443–3563. [FR Doc. 02–8100 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] by the Executive Director. Any member of the public interested 3. Review of Arthur Andersen annual BILLING CODE 4140–01–M in presenting oral comments to the financial audit. committee may notify the contact CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: person listed on this notice at least 5 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Thomas J. Trabucco, Director, Office of days in advance of the meeting. HUMAN SERVICES External Affairs, (202) 942–1640. Interested individuals and National Institutes of Health Dated: April 2, 2002. representatives of organizations may Elizabeth S. Woodruff, submit a letter of intent, a brief National Institute of General Medical Secretary to the Board, Federal Retirement description of the organization Sciences; Notice of Closed Meeting Thrift Investment Board. represented, and a short description of [FR Doc. 02–8258 Filed 4–2–02; 12:57 pm] the oral presentation. Presentations may Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as BILLING CODE 6760–01–M be limited to 5 minutes; both printed amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice and electronic copies are requested for is hereby given of the following the record. In addition, any interested meeting. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND person may file written comments with The meeting will be closed to the HUMAN SERVICES the committee by forwarding his/her public in accordance with the statement to the contact person listed on National Institutes of Health provisions set forth in sections this notice. The statement should 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Notice of Meeting; Interagency Autism include the name, address, telephone as amended. The grant applications and Coordinating Committee number and, when applicable, the the discussions could disclose business or professional affiliation of confidential trade secrets or commercial The National Institutes of Health the interested person. property such as patentable material, (NIH) hereby announces a meeting of Information about the meeting is also and personal information concerning the Interagency Autism Coordinating available on-line on the NIMH individuals associated with the grant Committee (IACC) to be held on May 24, homepage at http://www.nimh.nih.gov/ applications, the disclosure of which 2002, on the NIH campus in Bethesda, events/interagencyautism.cfm. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Maryland. invasion of personal privacy. The Children’s Health Act of 2000 Yvonne T. Maddox, Name of Committee: National Institute of (Pub. L. 106–310), Title I, Section 104, Acting Deputy Director, National Institutes General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis mandated the establishment of an of Health. Panel. Interagency Autism Coordinating [FR Doc. 02–8103 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Date: April 8, 2002. Committee (IACC) to coordinate autism Time: 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P research and other efforts within the Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Department of Health and Human applications. Services (DHHS). In April 2001, Place: National Institutes of Health, NIGMS, Office of Scientific Review, Natcher Secretary Tommy Thompson delegated Building, Room 1AS19, Bethesda, MD 20892, the authority to establish the IACC to (Telephone Conference Call). the NIH. The National Institute of Contact Person: Michael A. Sesma, PhD, Mental Health (NIMH) at the NIH has Office of Scientific Review, National Institute
VerDate 11
of General Medical Sciences, Natcher Dated: March 28, 2002. ACTION: Notice of receipt of permit Building, Room 1AS19H, 45 Center Drive, Anna Snouffer, applications. Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–2048, Deputy Director, Office of Federal Advisory [email protected]. Committee Policy. SUMMARY: The following applicants have This notice is being published less than 15 applied for a scientific research permit [FR Doc. 02–8102 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] days prior to the meeting due to the timing to conduct certain activities with limitations imposed by the review and BILLING CODE 4140–01–M endangered species pursuant to section funding cycle. 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Act of 1973, as amended (16 USC 1531 Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES et seq.). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and Service solicits review and comment Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry National Institutes of Health from local, State, and Federal agencies, Research; 93.862, Genetics and and the public on the following permit Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Center for Scientific Review; Notice of requests. Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Meeting [Permit No. TE–053379] Special Minority Initiatives, National Applicant: Christine Mukai, Irvin, Institutes of Health, HHS) Pursuant to section 10(a) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as California Dated: March 28, 2002. amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice The applicant requests a permit to Anna P. Snouffer, is hereby given of a meeting of the take (survey by pursuit) the Quino Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Center for Scientific Review Advisory checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas Committee Policy. Committee. editha quino) in conjunction with [FR Doc. 02–8101 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] The meeting will be open to the demographic studies in Riverside, San BILLING CODE 4140–01–M public, with attendance limited to space Diego, San Bernardino, Orange, Los available. Individuals who plan to Angeles, Santa Barbara, and Ventura attend and need special assistance, such Counties, California for the purpose of DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND as sign language interpretation or other enhancing its survival. HUMAN SERVICES reasonable accommodations, should [Permit No. TE–053605] notify the Contact Person listed below National Institutes of Health Applicant: University of Colorado, Ft. in advance of the meeting. Collins, Colorado National Institute on Aging; Notice of Name of Committee: Center for Scientific The applicant requests a permit to Closed Meeting Review Advisory Committee. take (reduce to possession) the Date: May 20, 2002. Asplenium fragile var. insulare (fragile Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Time: 9 AM to 3 PM. Agenda: Discussion Panal on Scientific fern), the Haplostachys haplostachya Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Boundaries for Review (PSBR). (honohono, Hawaiian mint), the amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Place: National Institutes of Health, Two Hedyotis coriacea (kio’ele, leather leaf is hereby given of the following Rockledge Center, Conference Room 9100, sweet ear), the Isodendrion laurifolium meeting. 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892. (Aupaka), the Neraudia ovata (ma’aloa The meeting will be closed to the Contact Person: Brent B. Stanfield, PHD, ma’aloa, spotted nettle brush), the Deputy Director, Center for Scientific Portulaca sclerocarpa (ihi, hard fruit public in accordance with the Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 provisions set forth in sections Rockledge Drive, Room 3016, MSC 7776, purslane), the Silene hawaiiensis 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435–1114. (Hawaiian catchfly), the Silene as amended. The grant applications and Information is also available on the lanceolata (lanceleaf catchfly), the the discussions could disclose Institute’s/Center’s home page: Solanum incompletum (popolu ku mai), confidential trade secrets or commercial www.csr.nih.gov/drgac/drgac.htm, where an the Spermolepis hawaiiensis (Hawaiian property such as patentable material, agenda and any additional information for parsley), the Stenogyne angustifolia and personal information concerning the meeting will be posted when available. (creeping mint), the Tetramolopium individuals associated with the grant (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance arenarium (Mauna Kea pamakani), and Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine, the Zanthoxylum hawaiiense (hea’e a’e, applications, the disclosure of which 93.306; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.333, would constitute a clearly unwarranted 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, Hawaiian yellow wood) in conjunction invasion of personal privacy. 93.846–93,878, 93.892, 93,893, National with species documentation surveys on the Big Island of Hawaii for the purpose Name of Committee: National Institute on Institutes of Health, HHS) of enhancing their survival. Aging Special Emphasis Panel. Dated: March 27, 2002. Date: April 8–9, 2002. LaVerne Y. Stringfield, [Permit No. TE–053598] Time: 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. Director, Office of Federal Advisory Applicant: Nicole Shorey, San Diego, Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Committee Policy. California applications. Place: Hilton Madison Monona Terrace, 9 [FR Doc. 02–8099 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] The applicant requests a permit to East Wilson Street, Madison, WI 53703. BILLING CODE 4140–01–M take (survey by pursuit) the Quino Contact Person: Alicja L. Markowska, PhD, checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas DSC, Scientific Review Office, Gateway editha quino) in conjunction with Building/Suite 2C212, 7201 Wisconsin DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR demographic studies in San Diego Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20817. County, California for the purpose of This notice is being published less than 15 Fish and Wildlife Service enhancing its survival. days prior to the meeting due to the timing [Permit No. TE–789266] limitations imposed by the review and Notice of Receipt of Applications for Applicant: Patricia Campbell, Temecula, funding cycle. Endangered Species Recovery Permit (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance California Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, The permittee requests a permit National Institutes of Health, HHS) Interior. amendment to take (harass by survey)
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16115
the southwestern willow flycatcher The applicant request a permit to take Statement (FEIS) on the Anacapa Island (Empidonax traillii extimus) in San (harass by survey, collect, and sacrifice) Restoration Project in support of a Diego, Los Angeles, Imperial, Orange, the Conservancy fairy shrimp special purpose migratory bird permit Riverside, Inyo, Kern, San Bernardino, (Branchinecta conservatio), the application submitted by NPS. Copies of San Luis Obispo, Ventura, and Santa longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta the adopted FEIS are available from the Barbara Counties, California in longiantenna), the San Diego fairy National Park Service (http:// conjunction with surveys for the shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis), www.nps.gov/chris/naturalresources/ purpose of enhancing its survival. the vernal pool tadpole shrimp AIRP.html) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife [Permit No. TE–053924] (Lepidurus packardi), and the Riverside Service (address below). Preparation of fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus wootoni) Applicant: Todd Sloat, McArthur, the Record of Decision will begin no throughout the range of each species in California sooner than 30 days from this notice. conjunction with surveys for the ADDRESSES: Questions should be The applicant requests a permit to purpose of enhancing their survival. take (harass by survey) the southwestern addressed to Brad Bortner, Chief, DATES: Written comments on these Division of Migratory Birds and Habitat willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii permit applications must be received extimus) in San Diego, Los Angeles, Programs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife within 30 days of the date of publication Service, 911 NE 11th Avenue, Portland, Imperial, Orange, Riverside, Kern, San of this notice. Bernardino, San Luis Obispo, Ventura, OR 97232–4181 (503–231–6164). ADDRESSES: Written data or comments and Santa Barbara Counties, California SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: should be submitted to the Chief, and Yuma, La Paz, and Mohave Endangered Species, Ecological Document Availability Counties, Arizona in conjunction with Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, surveys for the purpose of enhancing its Copies of the final Environmental 911 NE. 11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon survival. Impact Statement are available at the 97232–4181; Fax: (503) 231–6243. following government offices and [Permit No. TE–053928] Please refer to the respective permit library: Applicant: San Diego State University number for each application when The FEIS is available at Park Foundation, San Diego, California submitting comments. All comments Headquarters, Superintendent, Channel The applicant requests a permit to received, including names and Islands National Park, 1901 Spinnaker take (reduce to possession) the addresses, will become part of the Dr., Ventura, California 93001 (or via Nitrophila mohavensis (Amargosa official administrative record and may telephone at (805) 658–5700); on the niterwort) and the Centaurium be made available to the public. Park’s Web site (http:www.nps.gov/ namophilum namophilum (spring- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: chris/naturalresources/AIRP.html); and loving centaury) in Inyo County, Documents and other information at Fosters Library, Ventura, California. California in conjunction with species submitted with these applications are research for the purpose of enhancing available for review, subject to the A. Background their survival. requirements of the Privacy Act and Pursuant to the National Freedom of Information Act, by any Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the [Permit No. TE–053777] party who submits a written request for National Park Service prepared a Final a copy of such documents within 20 Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) Applicant: David Bise, Pasadena, days of the date of publication of this assessing the benefits to migratory birds California notice to the address above; telephone: and other natural resource values and The applicant requests a permit to (503) 231–2063. Please refer to the the potential impacts of eradicating the take (harass by survey) the southwestern respective permit number for each Black rat on Anacapa Island. This notice willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii application when requesting copies of of availability of the FEIS was originally extimus) and take (survey by pursuit) documents. published in a Federal Register Notice the Quino checkerspot butterfly Dated: March 20, 2002. dated October 12, 2000. Subsequently, (Euphydryas editha quino) in San Diego, Rowan W. Gould, the National Park Service applied for a Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San special purpose migratory bird permit Bernardino, and Ventura Counties, Acting Regional Director, Region 1, Portland, Oregon. (50 CFR 21.27) to take birds during California in conjunction with surveys eradication of the rats. for the purpose of enhancing their [FR Doc. 02–8109 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service survival. (Service) in accordance with 40 CFR [Permit No. TE–040531] 1506.3 and the Amended Memorandum Applicant: Kelly Volansky, Riverside, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Opinion (The Fund for Animals v. Fran California Mainella, USDCDC, Civil Action No. 01– Fish and Wildlife Service The permittee requests a permit 2288 [ESH], dated November 29, 2001) amendment to take (harass by survey) is adopting and recirculating the FEIS. Adoption and Notice of Availability of The FEIS presents alternatives and the southwestern willow flycatcher a Final Environmental Impact (Empidonax traillii extimus) throughout analyzes the anticipated effects of Statement (EIS) on the Anacapa Island implementing proposed actions to its range in Arizona, and the cactus Restoration Project ferruginous pygmy-owl (Glaucidium accomplish the following objectives: (1) brasilianum cactorum) in Pima, Pinal, AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Eradicating introduced Black rats on and Maricopa Counties, Arizona in Interior. Anacapa Island; (2) adopting an conjunction with surveys for the ACTION: Notice of availability. emergency response plan for accidental purpose of enhancing their survival. introductions of rodents on Anacapa, SUMMARY: This notice advises the public Santa Barbara, Prince, and Sutil Islands; [Permit No. TE–054120] that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and (3) incorporating a prevention Applicant: Russell Huddleston, is adopting the National Park Service strategy to reduce the potential for Sacramento, California (NPS) Final Environmental Impact rodents to be accidentally introduced to
VerDate 11
these islands of Channel Islands be most helpful, they should relate to management direction includes timber National Park. The proposed action was specific concerns or conflicts that are harvest of anywhere from 4.8 to 12.9 developed in concert with the Island within the legal responsibilities of the million board feet (MMBF), restoration Conservation and Ecology Group and is BLM and they must be able to be activities, road decommissionings, based on worldwide evaluation of other resolved in this planning process. water source enhancement projects, fuel island rat eradication projects. Actions Specific comments are the most useful hazard reduction treatments, and other to eradicate existing and prevent in helping us improve the analysis and land management direction. Public potential Black rat infestations are development of the preferred comments were considered in necessary because of the ecological alternative. Documents referenced in developing and analyzing issues and damage occurring on Anacapa Island, this draft EIS may be examined at the alternatives, along with local the benefit this action would have for Medford District Office during normal government, known interest groups and migratory birds, and the potential working hours. data developed by BLM staff. The negative impact they would have if DATES: The comment period will end 90 alternatives were designed to address, in introduced to other islands in Channel days after the publication of the different ways, the land and resource Islands National Park. Environmental Protection Agency’s management issues identified in the Dated: March 7, 2002. Notice of Availability of the draft early stages of the planning process. Rowan W. Gould, RMPA/LMP/EIS in the Federal Register. Authority: Federal Land Policy and Acting Regional Director, Region 1, Portland, Comments must be received on or Management Act (FLPMA) and the National Oregon. before the end of the comment period at Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). the address listed below. No public [FR Doc. 02–8126 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Dated: March 14, 2002. meetings, open houses or field tours of BILLING CODE 4310–55–P the project area have been scheduled at Lynda Boody, this time. If there is sufficient public Field Manager, Glendale Resource Area. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR interest, public meetings will be [FR Doc. 02–8228 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] arranged to discuss the management BILLING CODE 4310–33–U Bureau of Land Management alternatives and answer questions. At [OR110–6310–DP; HAG02–0126] least 15 days notice in local media will be given for activities where the public INTERNATIONAL TRADE Notice of Availability of the Draft is invited to attend. All meetings will be COMMISSION Kelsey Whisky Landscape published on the Medford District web [Inv. No. 337–TA–449] Management Plan, Associated site www.or.blm.gov/Medford under ‘‘Planning Documents’’ (subject to Amendments to the Medford Resource Certain Abrasive Products Made Using internet availability) and in the Grant’s Management Plan, and Draft a Process for Powder Preforms, and Pass Courier and Umpqua Free Press Environmental Impact Statement Products Containing Same; Notice of newspapers. Comments, including Commission Decision to Affirm ALJ AGENCY: Glendale Resource Area, names and addresses of commentors, Order No. 40 and Not to Review a Final Medford District, Bureau of Land will be available for public review. Initial Determination Finding a Management. Individual respondents may request Violation of Section 337; Schedule for ACTION: Notice of availability of the confidentiality. If you wish to withhold Filing Written Submissions on Draft Kelsey Whisky Landscape your name and/or address from public Remedy, the Public Interest, and Management Plan (LMP), Associated review or from disclosure under the Bonding Amendments to the Medford Resource Freedom of Information Act, you must Management Plan (RMPA), and Draft state this prominently at the beginning AGENCY: International Trade Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) of your written comment. Such requests Commission. (RMPA/LMP/EIS). will be honored to the extent allowed by ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Glendale Resource Area law. All submissions from organizations is providing the Draft Kelsey Whisky or businesses and from individuals SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Landscape Management Plan (LMP), identifying themselves as the U.S. International Trade Associated Amendments to the Medford representatives or officials of Commission has determined not to Resource Management Plan (RMPA), organizations or businesses, will be review the final initial determination and Draft Environmental Impact made available for public inspection in (ID) issued by the presiding Statement (EIS) (RMPA/LMP/EIS) for their entirety. administrative law judge (ALJ) on public review and comment. The ADDRESSES: Written comments should February 8, 2002, finding a violation of planning area encompasses be sent to Sherwood Tubman, section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 approximately 104,000 acres of public Ecosystem Planner, Glendale Resource U.S.C. 1337, in the above-captioned land managed by the Glendale Resource Area, Bureau of Land Management, investigation, and determined to affirm Area, Medford District and located in 3040 Biddle Road, Medford, Oregon ALJ Order No. 40 issued by the ALJ on Josephine, Douglas and Curry counties 97504. Planning records are available at October 12, 2001. in southwestern Oregon. The Bureau of this address for inspection during FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Land Management (BLM) has and will normal working hours. Requests for Michael K. Haldenstein, Esq., Office of continue to work closely with all copies of the draft plan can also be the General Counsel, U.S. International interested parties to identify the made by telephone to Sherwood Trade Commission, telephone 202–205– management decisions that are best Tubman at 541–618–2399 or Lynda 3041. General information concerning suited to the needs of the public. The Boody at 541–618–2279. the Commission may also be obtained public is invited to review and comment SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: There are by accessing its Internet server (http:// on the range and adequacy of the draft three action alternatives and a no-action www.usitc.gov). Hearing-impaired alternatives and associated alternative, each developed with persons are advised that information on environmental effects. For comments to differing emphasis. The range of the matter can be obtained by contacting
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16117
the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– importation of all Kinik abrasive aforementioned public interest factors 205–1810. products that infringe the ’489 patent, in the context of this investigation. Copies of the public version of ALJ which includes products produced If the Commission orders some form Order No. 40, the Commission’s opinion using Kinik’s DiaGrid process. He also of remedy, the President has 60 days to affirming that Order, the ID, and all recommended issuance of a cease and approve or disapprove the other nonconfidential documents filed desist order, and a bond during the Commission’s action. During this in connection with this investigation are Presidential review period in the period, the subject articles would be or will be available for inspection amount of 5 percent of the entered value during official business hours (8:45 a.m. of the infringing Kinik products. entitled to enter the United States under to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the On February 21, 2002, Kinik a bond, in an amount to be determined Secretary, U.S. International Trade petitioned for review of the ALJ’s final by the Commission and prescribed by Commission, 500 E Street, SW., ID. Kinik also appealed Order No. 40, the Secretary of the Treasury. The Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202– issued by the ALJ on October 12, 2001. Commission is therefore interested in 205–2000. That Order precluded Kinik from receiving submissions concerning the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The asserting 35 U.S.C. 271(g) as a non- amount of the bond that should be Commission instituted this investigation infringement defense. On February 28, imposed. 2002, 3M and the Commission on February 5, 2001, based upon a Written Submissions complaint filed on January 5, 2001, by investigative attorney (IA) filed Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. oppositions to Kinik’s petition for The parties to the investigation, (‘‘3M’’) of St. Paul, Minnesota and review and its appeal of Order No. 40. interested government agencies, and any Ultimate Abrasive Systems, LLC Having reviewed the record in this other interested parties are encouraged (‘‘UAS’’) of Atlanta, Georgia. 66 FR 9720 investigation, including the parties’ to file written submissions on remedy, written submissions, the Commission (Feb. 9, 2001). Their complaint named the public interest, and bonding. Such has determined to affirm Order No. 40 Kinik Company (‘‘Kinik’’) of Taipei, submissions should address the and not to review the ID in its entirety. Taiwan and Kinik Corporation (‘‘Kinik February 8, 2002 recommended Corp.’’) of Anaheim, California as The Commission will issue an opinion explaining its reasons for affirming determination by the ALJ on remedy respondents. and bonding. Complainant and the IA Complainants alleged that Order No. 40. respondents had violated section 337 by In connection with final disposition are also requested to submit proposed importing into the United States, selling of this investigation, the Commission remedial orders for the Commission’s for importation, and selling within the may issue (1) an order that could result consideration. The written submissions United States after importation certain in the exclusion of the subject articles and proposed remedial orders must be abrasive products that are made using a from entry into the United States, and/ filed no later than the close of business process for making powder preforms or (2) cease and desist orders that could on April 11, 2002. Reply submissions that is covered by claims 1, 4, 5, and 8 result in Kinik being required to cease must be filed no later than the close of of U.S. Letters Patent 5,620,489 (‘‘the and desist from engaging in unfair acts business on April 18, 2002. No further ’489 patent’’), owned by UAS and in the importation and sale of such submissions will be permitted unless exclusively licensed to 3M. The articles. Accordingly, the Commission is otherwise ordered by the Commission. interested in receiving written complaint further alleged that an Persons filing written submissions submissions that address the form of industry in the United States exists as must file with the Office of the Secretary remedy, if any, that should be ordered. required by subsection (a)(2) of section the original and 14 true copies thereof If a party seeks exclusion of an article 337. on or before the deadlines stated above. Complainants moved to terminate the from entry into the United States for Any person desiring to submit a investigation with respect to Kinik Corp. purposes other than entry for document (or portion thereof) to the after they concluded that Kinik Corp consumption, the party should so was not manufacturing or importing indicate and provide information Commission in confidence must request products that infringed the ’489 patent. establishing that activities involving confidential treatment unless the The ALJ granted this motion on June 19, other types of entry either are adversely information has already been granted 2001, in an ID (Order No. 15) and the affecting it or are likely to do so. For such treatment during the proceedings. Commission determined not to review background information, see the All such requests should be directed to that ID. On August 8, 2001, the ALJ Commission Opinion, Certain Devices the Secretary of the Commission and issued an ID (Order No. 19) that the for Connecting Computers via must include a full statement of the economic prong of the domestic Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337–TA–360, reasons why the Commission should industry requirement was satisfied with USITC Publication 2843 (Dec. 1994). grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. respect to the claims at issue of the 489 If the Commission contemplates some Documents for which confidential patent, and the Commission determined form of remedy, it must consider the treatment is granted by the Commission not to review that ID. effects of that remedy upon the public will be treated accordingly. All An evidentiary hearing was held on interest. The factors the Commission nonconfidential written submissions October 10–17, 27, and 30, 2001. On will consider include the effect that an will be available for public inspection at February 8, 2002, the ALJ issued his exclusion order and/or cease and desist the Office of the Secretary. orders would have on (1) the public final ID, in which he determined that This action is taken under the health and welfare, (2) competitive Kinik’s accused DiaGrid abrasive authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act products infringed claims 1, 4, 5, and 8 conditions in the U.S. economy, (3) U.S. of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and §§ 210.42, of the ’489 patent and that the ’489 production of articles that are like or 210.43, 210.45, 210.46, and 210.50 of patent was valid and enforceable. Based directly competitive with those that are the Commission’s rules of practice and upon these findings, he found a subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. procedure, 19 CFR 210.42, 210.43, violation of section 337. consumers. The Commission is The ALJ recommended issuance of a therefore interested in receiving written 210.45, 210.46, and 210.50. limited exclusion order barring submissions that address the Issued: March 29, 2002.
VerDate 11
By order of the Commission. The hearing will include the usual program, which complements the COPS Marilyn R. Abbott, public presentations by petitioners and Office’s efforts to fund additional Secretary. by respondents, with questions from the community policing officers and to [FR Doc. 02–8106 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Commission. In addition, the hearing support innovative community policing, will include an in camera session for a will enhance law enforcement BILLING CODE 7020–02–P confidential presentation by K&C and a infrastructures and community policing rebuttal presentation by petitioner. efforts in tribal communities which INTERNATIONAL TRADE Questions from the Commission relating have limited resources and are affected COMMISSION to the BPI will follow each of the in by high rates of crime and violence. camera presentations. During the in Applications should reflect the camera session the room will be cleared department’s most serious law [Investigation Nos. 731–TA–929 to 931 of all persons except those who have enforcement needs and must link these (Final)] been granted access to BPI under a needs to the implementation or Silicomanganese From India, Commission administrative protective enhancement of community policing. In Kazakhstan and Venezuela; Notice of order (APO) and are included on the addition, a Retention Plan Certification Commission Determination to Conduct Commission’s APO service list in this form outlining how COPS-funded a Portion of the Hearing in Camera investigations. See 19 CFR 201.35(b)(1), officer positions will be retained after (2). The time for the parties’ Federal funding has ended must be AGENCY: International Trade presentations and rebuttals in the in submitted with the grant application. Commission. camera session will be taken from their All Federally Recognized Tribes with ACTION: Closure of a portion of a respective overall allotments for the established police departments or Commission hearing to the public. hearing. All persons planning to attend existing police efforts are eligible to the in camera portions of the hearing apply. Federally Recognized Tribes that SUMMARY: Upon request of should be prepared to present proper wish to establish police departments Transnational Co. Kazchrome and Aksu identification. and meet specific criteria are also Ferroalloy Plant and Considar, Inc. Authority: On behalf of the General eligible to apply. Federally Recognized (collectively ‘‘K&C’’), the Commission Counsel, the Deputy General Counsel has Tribes may also apply as a consortium has determined to conduct a portion of certified, pursuant to Commission Rule with a written partnership agreement its hearing in the above-captioned 201.39 (19 CFR § 201.39) that, in his opinion, that names a lead agency and describes investigation scheduled for April 2, a portion of the Commission’s hearing in how requested resources will serve the 2002, in camera. See Commission rules Silicomanganese from India, Kazakhstan and Venezuela, Invs. Nos. 731–TA–929 to 931 consortium’s population. In addition, 207.24(d), 201.13(m) and 201.36(b)(4) tribes that are currently served by (19 CFR 207.24(d), 201.13(m) and (Final) may be closed to the public to prevent the disclosure of BPI. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) law 201.36(b)(4)). The remainder of the Issued: April 1, 2002. enforcement may request funding under hearing will be open to the public. The this grant program to supplement their By order of the Commission. Commission has determined that seven- existing police services. Tribes whose day advance notice of the change to a Marilyn R. Abbott, law enforcement services are meeting was not possible. See Secretary. exclusively provided by local policing Commission rule 201.35(a), (c)(1) (19 [FR Doc. 02–8136 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] agencies through a contract agreement CFR 201.35(a), (c)(1)). BILLING CODE 7020–02–P are not eligible under the COPS TRGP FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: program, but may be eligible to apply to Laurent de Winter, Office of General the COPS Universal Hiring Program for Counsel, U.S. International Trade DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE police officer positions only. Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202– Office of Community Oriented Policing DATES: Applications will be sent to all 708–5452, e-mail [email protected]. Services; FY 2002 Community Policing Federally Recognized Tribes with Hearing-impaired individuals are Discretionary Grants existing law enforcement efforts by advised that information on this matter April 2002. Tribes or villages that wish AGENCY: Office of Community Oriented to apply as a start-up or consortium may may be obtained by contacting the Policing Services, Department of Justice. Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– request an application kit from the COP ACTION: 205–1810. Notice of availability. Office. The deadline for the submission of applications is May 17, 2002. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SUMMARY: The Department of Justice, Applications must be postmarked by Commission believes that K&C have Office of Community Oriented Policing May 17, 2002 to be considered eligible. justified the need for a closed session. Services (‘‘COPS’’) announces the They seek a closed session to allow availability of funds under the Tribal ADDRESSES: To obtain an application or testimony concerning petitioner’s Resources Grant Program, a program for more information, call the U.S. financial performance, capacity designed to meet the most serious needs Department of Justice Response Center utilization, and market share. Because of law enforcement in Indian at 1–800–421–6770. A copy of the there is only one domestic producer of communities through a comprehensive application kit will also be available in silicomanganese, such discussions will grant program that will offer a variety of April on the COPS Office web site at: necessitate disclosure of business funding options including: New, http://www.cops.usdoj.gov. proprietary information (BPI), and they additional police officer positions; basic FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The can only occur if a portion of the and/or specialized training for new and U.S. Department of Justice Response hearing is held in camera. In making existing officers; training in community Center, 1–800–421–6770 and ask to this decision, the Commission policing, grants management and speak with your Grant Program nevertheless reaffirms its belief that computer training; uniforms and basic Specialist. whenever possible its business should issue equipment; department-wide be conducted in public. technology; and police vehicles. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16119
Overview (The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance information on the COPS Office are also (CFDA) reference for this program is 16.710.) available on the Internet via the COPS The Violent Crime Control and Law Dated: March 27, 2002. Web site at: www.cops.usdoj.gov. Enforcement Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 103– Carl R. Peed, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 322) authorizes the Department of Director, Office of Community Oriented Justice to make grants to increase Policing Services. Overview deployment of law enforcement officers [FR Doc. 02–8090 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] devoted to community policing on the BILLING CODE 4410–AT–M The Violent Crime Control and Law streets and rural routes of this nation. Enforcement act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103– The Tribal Resources Grant Program is 322) authorizes the Department of a program developed to meet the most DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Justice to make grants to increase serious needs of law enforcement in deployment of law enforcement officers tribal communities through a Office of Community Oriented Policing devoted to community policing on the comprehensive grant program that will Services; FY 2002 Community Policing streets and rural routes of this nation. offer a variety of funding options. This Discretionary Grants program will enhance law enforcement The Universal Hiring Program (UHP) AGENCY: infrastructures and community policing Office of Community Oriented enables interested agencies to efforts in these tribal communities, Policing Services, Department of Justice. supplement their current sworn forces, many of which have limited resources ACTION: Notice of availability. or interested jurisdictions to establish a new agency, through federal grants for and are affected by high rates of crime SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of up to three years. All policing agencies, and violence. Justice, Office of Community Oriented as well as jurisdictions seeking to The Tribal Resources Grant Program Policing Services (COPS) announces the is part of a larger federal initiative availability of Universal Hiring Program establish new policing agencies, are which over the last four years, has (UHP) grants to pay up to 75 percent of eligible to apply for this program. resulted in the Departments of Interior the entry-level salary and benefits for Grants will be made for up to 75 and Justice working in collaboration to newly hired, additional sworn officers percent of the entry level salary and improve law enforcement in tribal over a three year grant term, up to a benefits for each new officer over three communities. Funding has been maximum of $75,000 per officer. A years, up to a maximum of $75,000 per appropriated to several DOJ agencies minimum 25 percent local match, paid officer, with a required minimum 25 including the FBI, the Bureau of Justice with state or local funds, is required. To percent local match to be paid with state Assistance (BJA), the Office of Juvenile qualify for funding, officers must be or local funds. Funding will begin once Justice and Delinquency Prevention hired on or after the grant award start the new officers have been hired on or (OJJDP), the Corrections Program Office date. Funding will begin once the new after the date of the award, and will be (CPO), and the COPS Office. COPS is officers have been hired on or after the paid over the course of the grant. date of the award, and will be paid over coordinating with these agencies as well Officers must be hired on or after the as with the Office of Law Enforcement the course of the grant. At the time of grant award start date to qualify for Services of the Bureau of Indian Affairs application, applicants must agree to grant funding. to ensure that limited resources are not plan for the retention of each COPS- spent on duplicative efforts. funded UHP position awarded with Waivers of the non-federal matching A total of $35,000,000 in funding will state, local or other non-COPS funds at requirement may be requested under be available under the Tribal Resources the conclusion of federal funding, for a UHP, but will be granted only upon a Grant Program. The grant will cover a minimum of one full local budget cycle. demonstration of extraordinary fiscal maximum federal share of 75% of total The retention requirement cannot be hardship. project costs up to specified Federal satisfied through attrition. All policing COPS grant funds must not be used to share funding cap depending on the agencies, as well as jurisdictions seeking replace funds that eligible agencies funding category. A local match to establish new policing agencies, are otherwise would have devoted to officer eligible to apply for this program. requirement of at least 25% of the total hiring in the absence of the grant. In project costs is included in this DATES: The priority consideration other words, any hiring under UHP program. A waiver of the local match deadline for UHP funding is May 24, must be in addition to, and not in lieu 2002. The second and final deadline requirement may be requested at the of, officers that otherwise would have date for all UHP applications is June 21, time of application. Waivers are been hired. At the time of application, 2002. All UHP applications must be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, based applicants must agree to plan for the on a demonstration of severe fiscal postmarked by the final deadline date. retention of each COPS-funded UHP distress. Tribes whose law enforcement Applications postmarked after the final position awarded with state, local or service are exclusively provided by deadline date will not be considered. other non-COPS funds at the conclusion local policing agencies through contract All grant awards are subject to the arrangements are not eligible under this availability of funds. In the event that of federal funding, for a minimum of COPS program. However, tribes that do UHP funding requests exceed available one full local budget cycle. The not meet the eligibility requirements for grant funds, applications may be retention requirement cannot be this program may be eligible to apply to considered in subsequent fiscal years. satisfied through attrition. the COPS Office Universal Hiring Since funding is limited under UHP, we An award under the COPS Universal Program for police officer positions encourage interested agencies to apply Hiring Program will not affect the only. early. consideration of an agency’s eligibility Receiving an awarded under the ADDRESSES: To obtain a copy of an for a grant under other COPS programs. Tribal Resources Grant Program will not application or for additional The Catalog of Federal Domestic preclude grantees from future information, call the U.S. Department of Assistance (CFDA) reference for this program consideration under other COPS grant Justice Response Center at 1–800–421– is 16.710. programs for which they are eligible. 6770. The UHP application kit and
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16120 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
Dated: March 15, 2002. 616–5594, or (202) 616–5525 (TDD for form of documentation over another for Carl R. Peed, the hearing impaired). OSC’s e-mail hiring purposes. Requiring more or Director, Office of Community Oriented address is: [email protected]. specific documents to prove identity Policing Services. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office and work authorization may constitute [FR Doc. 02–8115 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] of Special Counsel for Immigration document abuse. BILLING CODE 4410–AT–M Related Unfair Employment Practices of OSC is responsible for receiving and the Civil Rights Division of the investigating discrimination charges Department of Justice announces the and, when appropriate, filing DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE availability of funds to conduct cost- complaints with specially designated effective public education programs administrative law judges. OSC also Civil Rights Division; Office of Special concerning the antidiscrimination initiates independent investigations of Counsel, for Immigration Related, provisions of INA. Funds will be possible immigration related job Unfair Employment Practices; awarded to selected applicants who discrimination. Immigration Related Employment propose cost-effective ways of educating While OSC has established a record of Discrimination; Public Education employers, workers covered by this vigorous enforcement, studies by the Grants statute, and/or the general public. U.S. General Accounting Office and other sources have shown that there is AGENCY: Office of Special Counsel for Background an extensive lack of knowledge on the Immigration Related Unfair The Immigration and Nationality Act part of protected individuals and Employment Practices, Civil Rights protects work-authorized individuals employers about the antidiscrimination Division, Department of Justice. from employment discrimination based provisions of the INA. Enforcement ACTION: Notice of availability of funds on their citizenship status and/or cannot be effective if potential victims and solicitation for grant applications. national origin. Federal law also makes of discrimination are not aware of their rights. Moreover, discrimination can SUMMARY: knowingly hiring unauthorized workers The Office of Special Counsel never be eradicated so long as for Immigration Related Unfair unlawful, and requires employers to verify the identity and work employers are not aware of their Employment Practices (OSC) announces responsibilities. the availability of funds for grants to authorization of all new employees. conduct public education programs Employers who violate this law are Purpose subject to sanctions, including fines and about the rights afforded potential OSC seeks to educate both workers victims of employment discrimination possible criminal prosecution. Employers of four or more employees and employers about their rights and and the responsibilities of employers responsibilities under the under the antidiscrimination provisions are prohibited from discriminating on the basis of citizenship status or antidiscrimination provisions of INA. of the Immigration and Nationality Act Because previous grantees have (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1324b. national origin in hiring, firing, recruitment or referral for a fee, and developed a wealth of materials (e.g., It is anticipated that a number of brochures, posters, booklets, grants will be competitively awarded to prohibits employers from engaging in document abuse in the employment information packets and videos) to applicants who can demonstrate a educate these groups, OSC has capacity to design and successfully eligibility verification process. U.S. citizens and certain classes of determined that the main focus of the implement public education campaigns work authorized individuals are program should be on the actual to combat immigration related protected from citizenship status delivery of these materials to educate employment discrimination. Grants will discrimination. Protected non-citizens further both potential victims and range in size from $40,000 to $100,000. employers. OSC seeks proposals that OSC will accept proposals from include: • Temporary Residents; will use existing materials effectively to applicants who have access to potential • Legal Permanent Residents; educate large numbers of workers or victims of discrimination or whose • Refugees; employers about exercising their rights experience qualifies them to educate • Asylees. or fulfilling their obligations under the workers, employers and the general Citizens and all work authorized antidiscrimination provisions. OSC will, public about the antidiscrimination individuals are protected from of course, consider any proposal that provisions of the INA. OSC welcomes discrimination on the basis of national articulates and substantiates other proposals from diverse nonprofit origin. However, this prohibition creative means of reaching these organizations such as local, regional or applies only to employers with four to populations. national ethnic and immigrants’ rights fourteen employees. National origin advocacy organizations, labor discrimination complaints against Program Description organizations, trade associations, employers with fifteen or more The program is designed to develop industry groups, professional employees remain under the and implement cost-effective organizations, or other nonprofit jurisdiction of the Equal Employment approaches to educate potential victims entities, including state and local Opportunity Commission pursuant to of employment discrimination about government agencies, providing Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, their rights and to educate employers information services to potential victims 42 U.S.C. 2000e, et seq. about their responsibilities under INA’s of discrimination and/or employers. In addition, under the document antidiscrimination provisions. Application Due Date: May 20, 2002. abuse provision of the law, employers Applications may propose to educate FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: must accept all forms of work potential victims only, employers only, Patita McEvoy, Public Affairs Specialist, authorization and proof of identity or both in a single campaign. Program Office of Special Counsel for allowed by the Immigration and budgets must include the travel, lodging Immigration Related Unfair naturalization Service (INS) for and other expenses necessary for up to Employment Practices, 1425 New York completion of the Employment two program staff members to attend the Ave., NW., Suite 9000, P.O. Box 27728, Eligibility Verification (I–9) Form. mandatory OSC grantee training (2 days) Washington, DC 20038–7728. Tel (202) Employers may not prefer or require one held in Washington, DC at the beginning
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16121
of the grant period (late autumn). how the programs will interact and how grant application process and will not Proposals should outline the following the budgets will be administered. be considered. key elements of the program: Proposals should discuss the In determining which application to fund, OSC will consider the following Part I: Intended Audience(s) components of the campaign strategy, detail the reasons supporting the choice (based on a one-hundred point scale): The educational efforts under the of each component, and explain how 1. Program Design (50 points) grant should be directed to (1) work- each component will effectively authorized non-citizens who are contribute to the overall objective of Sound program design and cost- protected individuals, since this group cost-effective dissemination of useful effective strategies for educating the is especially vulnerable to employment and accurate information to a wide intended population are imperative. discrimination; (2) those citizens who audience of protected individuals or Consequently, areas that will be closely are most likely to become victims of employers. Discussions of the campaign examined include the following: employment discrimination; and/or (3) strategies and supporting rationale a. Evidence of in-depth knowledge of employers, especially small businesses. should be clear, concise, and based on the goals and objectives of the project. The proposals should define the sound evidence and reasoning. (10 points) characteristics of the work authorized Since there presently exists a wealth b. Selection and definition of the population or the employer group(s) of materials for use in educating the intended audience(s) for the campaign, intended to be the focus of the public, applicants should include in and the factors that support the educational campaign, and the their budget proposals the costs for selection, including special needs, and applicant’s qualifications to reach distribution of materials received from the applicant’s qualifications to reach credibly and effectively large segments OSC or from current/past OSC grantees. effectively the intended audience(s). (15 of the intended audience(s). points) The proposals should also detail the To the extent that applicants believe the c. A cost-effective campaign strategy reasons for focusing on each group of development of original materials particularly suited to their campaign is for educating employers and/or protected individuals or employers by members of the protected class, with a describing particular needs or other necessary, their proposal should articulate in detail the circumstances requiring the justification for the choice of strategy, factors to support the selection. In development of such materials. All such including the degree to which the defining the campaign focuses and materials must be approved by OSC prior to campaign has prevented immigration supporting the reasons for the selection, production to ensure legal accuracy and related unfair employment practices and applicants may use census data, studies, proper emphasis. Proposed revisions/ has reached individuals with such surveys, or any other sources of translations of OSC-approved materials must claims. (15 points) information of generally accepted also be submitted for clearance. All d. The evaluation methods proposed reliability. information distributed should also identify OSC as a source of assistance, information by the applicant to measure the Part II: Campaign Strategy and action, and include the correct address effectiveness of the campaign and their precision in indicating to what degree We encourage applicants to devise and telephone numbers of OSC, (including the campaign is successful. (10 points) effective and creative means of public the toll-free numbers, TDD numbers) and OSC e-mail and Internet addresses. education and information 2. Administrative Capability (20 points) dissemination that are specifically Part III: Evaluation of the Strategy Proposals will be rated in terms of the designed to reach the widest possible capability of the applicant to define the One of the central goals of this intended audience. Those applicants intended audience, reach it and program is determining what public proposing educational campaigns implement the public education and education strategies are most effective addressing potential victims of evaluation components of the campaign: and thus, should be included in future discrimination should keep in mind that a. Evidence of proven ability to public education efforts. Therefore, it is some of the traditional methods of provide high quality results. (10 points) critical that the methods of evaluating public communication may be less than b. Evidence that the applicant can the campaign strategy and public optimal for educating members of implement the campaign, and complete education materials and their results be national or linguistic groups that have the evaluation component within the carefully detailed. A full evaluation of a limited community-based support and time lines provided. (10 points) communication networks. project’s effectiveness is due within 60 Grants are an important component of days of the conclusion of a campaign. Note: OSC’s experience during previous OSC partnerships to better serve the Interim evaluation/activity reports are grant cycles has shown that a number of public, employers and potential due at least quarterly, or more applicants choose to apply as a consortium frequently as needed throughout the of individual entities; or, if applying discrimination victims. Grantees should individually, propose the use of plan to include OSC attorneys and other grant year. subcontractors to undertake certain limited professional staff in public outreach Selection Criteria functions. It is essential that these applicants programs in order to more successfully demonstrate the proven management reach their audiences and prevent The final selection of grantees for capability and experience to ensure that, as discrimination before it occurs or award will be made by the Special lead agency, they will be directly accountable combat it where it exists. Counsel for Immigration Related Unfair for the successful implementation, Some grantees who are conducting Employment Practices. completion, and evaluation of the project. citizenship campaigns have, in the past, A panel made up of OSC staff will combined those efforts and resources review and rate the applications and 3. Staff Capability (10 points) with the INA antidiscrimination make recommendations to the Special Applications will be evaluated in education campaigns in order to Counsel regarding funding. The panel’s terms of the degree to which: maximize the scope and breadth of the results are advisory in nature and not a. The duties outlined for grant- project and to reach a larger number of binding on the Special Counsel. Letters funded positions appear appropriate to individuals. Applicants proposing to of support, endorsement, or the work that will be conducted under combine these efforts should discuss recommendation are not part of the the award. (5 points)
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16122 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
b. The qualifications of the grant- Antidiscrimination Provisions of the Dated: March 28, 2002. funded positions appear to match the Immigration and Nationality Act, (box #10 of Juan Carlos Benı´tez, the SF 424). requirements of these positions. (5 Special Counsel for Immigration, Related points) 2. OJP Form 4061/6 (Certification Unfair Employment Practices. Note: If the grant project manager or other Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, [FR Doc. 02–8110 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] member of the professional staff is to be hired Suspension and Other Responsibility BILLING CODE 4410–13–M later as part of the grant, or should there be Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace any change in professional staff during the Requirements). grant period, hiring is subject to review and 3. Disclosure Form to Report DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE approval by OSC at that time. Lobbying (SF LLL). 4. OJP Form 4000/3 (Assurances). Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree 4. Previous Experience (20 points) 5. An abstract of the full proposal, not in Comprehensive Environmental The proposals will be evaluated on to exceed one page. Response, Compensation and Liability the degree to which the applicant 6. A program narrative of not more Act Cost Recovery Action demonstrates that it has successfully than fifteen (15) double-spaced typed In accordance with Departmental carried out programs or work of a pages that includes the following: policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby similar nature in the past. a. A clear statement describing the given that a Consent Decree in United Eligible Applicants approach and strategy to be used to States v. Agere Systems, Inc., et al., Civil complete the tasks identified in the Action No. 02–CV–1681 was lodged This grant competition is open to program description; nonprofit organizations, including labor with the United States District Court for b. A clear statement of the proposed the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on organizations, employer groups and goals and objectives, including a listing state and local government agencies. March 27, 2002. of the major events, activities, products The Consent Decree resolves the Grant Period and Award Amount and timetables for completion and the United States’ claims against twelve extent of OSC participation in grantee defendants—Agere Systems, Inc.; It is anticipated that several grants outreach events; will be awarded and will range in size American Color and Chemical, LLC; c. The proposed staffing plan. Note: If Carpenter Technology Corporation; from $40,000 to $100,000. grant project manager or other Publications of this announcement Continental Holdings, Inc.; Exide professional staff member is to be hired does not require OSC to award any Technologies, Inc.; The Glidden later as part of the grant, or should there specific number of grants, or to obligate Company; Hofmann Industries, Inc.; be a change in professional staff, hiring all or any part of available funds. The Honeywell International Inc.; Quadrant is subject to review and approval by period of performance will be twelve EPP, Inc.; Sonoco Fibre Drum, Inc.; OSC at that time; and months from the date of the grant Sonoco Products Company; and d. Description of how the project will award, in most cases beginning October Unisource Worldwide, Inc. (‘‘Settling be evaluated. 1, 2002. Defendants’’)—under Section 107(a) of 7. A proposed budget outlining all the Comprehensive Environmental Application Deadline direct and indirect costs for personnel, Response, Compensation and Liability All applications must be received by fringe benefits, travel, equipment, Act (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9607(a), for 6 PM EDT, May 20, 2002. If using supplies, subcontractors, and a short past response costs incurred by the regular first-class mail, send to: narrative justification of each budgeted United States at the Berks Landfill U.S.Department of Justice, Civil Rights line item cost. If an indirect cost rate is Superfund Site in Spring Township, Division, Office of Special Counsel for used in the budget, then a copy of a Berks County, Pennsylvania. The Immigration Related Unfair current fully executed agreement Consent Decree requires the Settling Employment Practices, 950 between the applicant and the cognizant Defendants to pay $1,100,000.00 to the Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, Federal agency must accompany the United States. DC 20530. If using messengers, budget. The Department of Justice will accept overnight or priority mail, send to: Note: Program budgets must include the written comments on the proposed Office of Special Counsel for travel, lodging and other expenses necessary Consent Decree for thirty (30) days from Immigration Related Unfair for not more than two program staff members the date of publication of this notice. Employment Practices, U.S. Department to attend the mandatory OSC grantee training Please address comments to the of Justice, 1425 New York Ave., NW., (2 days) held in Washington, DC at the Assistant Attorney General, beginning of the grant period (late Autumn). Suite 9000, Washington, DC 20005. Environment and Natural Resources Applications may not be submitted via 8. Copies of resumes of the Division, Department of Justice, PO Box facsimile machine. professional staff proposed in budget. 7611, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, Application forms may be obtained by DC 20044–7611 and refer to United Application Requirements writing or telephoning: U.S. Department States v. Agere Systems, Inc., DOJ Ref. Applicants should submit an original of Justice, Civil Rights Division, Office No 90–11–2–1347/1. and two (2) copies of their completed of Special Counsel for Immigration Copies of the proposed Consent proposal by the deadline established Related Unfair Employment Practices, Decree may be examined at the Office of above. All submissions must contain the 950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., the United States Attorney, Eastern following items in the order listed Washington, DC 20530. Tel. (202) 616– District of Pennsylvania, 615 Chestnut below: 5594, or (202) 616–5525 (TDD for the Street, Suite 1250, Philadelphia, PA 1. A completed and signed hearing impaired). This announcement 19106, and at EPA Region III, 1650 Arch Application for Federal Assistance and the required forms will also appear Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029. (Standard Form 424). on the World Wide Web at Copies of the proposed Consent Decree Note: The Catalogue of Federal Domestic www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/ In order to may also be obtained by mail from the Assistance number is 16.110 and the title is, facilitate handling, please do not use U.S. Department of Justice, Consent Education & Enforcement of the covers, binders or tabs. Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611,
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16123
Washington, DC 20044–7611, or by Under the terms of the proposed In this action the United States sought faxing a request to Tonia Fleetwood, Consent Decree lodged with the Court, civil penalties and injunctive relief from facsimile no. (202) 514–0097, phone the Settling Defendants will, among Ferro Corporation (‘‘Ferro’’) for its confirmation no. (202) 514–1547. When other things: (a) Implement the cleanup violations of the Clean Air Act (the requesting copies, please enclose a plan selected by the U.S. Environmental ‘‘Act’’), the federally-approved check to cover the twenty-five cents per Protection Agency (EPA) for the Mine provisions of the Indiana State page reproduction costs payable to the Flooding Site, (b) reimburse EPA for its Implementation Plan, and three ‘‘Consent Decree Library’’ in the amount past costs in responding to the releases administrative orders issued by the of $9.00 and reference United States v. of hazardous substances at the Mine United States Environmental Protection Agere Systems, Inc., DOJ Ref. No. 90– Flooding Site, and (c) make a lump sum Agency (‘‘U.S. EPA’’). The consent 11–2–1347/1. payment to EPA to cover its anticipated decree, which reflects a settlement of future costs in overseeing and the claims of three environmental Robert D. Brook, monitoring the cleanup at the Mine agencies, the Untied States Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement Flooding Site. Environmental Protection Agency, the Section, Environment and Natural Resources, The Department of Justice will receive Division, Department of Justice. Indiana Department of Environmental comments relating to the proposed Management, and the City of [FR Doc. 02–8094 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Consent Decree for a period of thirty Hammond’s Department of BILLING CODE 4410–15–M (30) days from the date of this Environmental Management, obligates publication. Comments should be Ferro to pay the three agencies DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE addressed to the Office of the Assistant collectively civil penalties totaling $3 Attorney General, Environment and million: $1,050,000 to the United States, Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Natural Resources Division, Department $600,000 to the State of Indiana and Under the Comprehensive of Justice, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, $1,350,000 to the City of Hammond. Environmental Response, DC 20044–7611, and refer to United Additionally, Ferro is obligated Compensation, and Liability Act States v. ARCO, DOJ Case Number 90– pursuant to the consent decree to: (1) (‘‘CERCLA’’) 11–2–430. Hire an independent consultant to The proposed Consent Decree may be conduct an Environmental Management Under the policy set out at 28 CFR examined at the office of the United System (‘‘EMS’’) audit at the facility; 50.7, notice is hereby given that on States Attorney for the District of and (2) as a state and city environmental March 25, 2002, the United States Montana, 2929 Third Avenue North, project, finance a brownfield clean-up lodged a proposed Consent Decree for Suite 400, Billings, Montana 59101, and project in the City of Hammond, which the Mine Flooding Operable Unit in at U.S. EPA Region VIII Montana Office, is valued at $844,000. Butte, Montana (the ‘‘Mine Flooding Federal Building, 10 West 15th Street, The Department of Justice will receive Consent Decree’’) in United States v. Suite 3200, Helena, Montana 59624. A for a period of thirty (30) days from the Atlantic Richfield Company et al., Civil copy of the proposed Consent Decree date of this publication comments Action No. 02–35–BU–RFC, with the may also be obtained by mailing a relating to this proposed settlement. United States District Court for the request to the Consent Decree Library, Comments should be addressed to the District of Montana. U.S. Department of Justice, P.O. Box Assistant Attorney General, This lawsuit was brought by the 7611, Washington, DC 20044–7611, or Environment and Natural Resources United States against five entities— by faxing a request to Tonia Fleetwood, Division, P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Atlantic Richfield Company; ASARCO; Department of Justice Consent Decree Department of Justice, Washington, DC Montana Resources; Montana Library, fax no. (202) 616–6584; phone 20044–7611, and should refer to United Resources, Incorporated; AR confirmation no. (202) 514–1547. States v. Ferro Corporation Civil Action Corporation; and Dennis Washington In requesting a copy of the Consent No. 2:02 CV 115, D.J. Ref. 90–5–2–1– (collectively, the ‘‘Settling Decree, please reference United States v. 1910/1. Defendants’’)—under Sections 106, 107 ARCO, DOJ Case Number 90–11–2–430, The consent decree may be examined and 113(g)(2) of the Comprehensive and enclose a check in the amount of at the United States Attorney’s Office, Environmental Response, Compensation $30.50 (25 cents per page reproduction Northern District of Indiana, 1001 Main and Liability Act of 1980, as amended cost) payable to the U.S. Treasury. Street, Suite A, Dyer, Indiana 46311, (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9606, 9607, and at U.S. EPA Region 5, 77 West 9613(g)(2), for: (a) The recovery of costs W. Benjamin Fisherow, Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois incurred by EPA in response to releases Deputy Chief, Environmental Enforcement 60604. A copy of the consent decree and threatened releases of hazardous Section, Environment and Natural Resources may also be obtained by mail from the substances at and from the Butte Mine Division. Consent Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611, Flooding Operable Unit, including a [FR Doc. 02–8093 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, related removal action at the Travona BILLING CODE 4410–15–M DC 20044–761 or by faxing a request to Shaft/West Camp Operable Unit, which Tonia Fleetwood, fax no. (202) 514– is part of the Butte Mine Flooding 0097, phone confirmation number (202) Operable Unit (collectively the ‘‘Mine DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 514–1547. In requesting a copy, please Flooding Site’’), together with accrued Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree enclose a check in the amount of $7.00 interest; (b) a declaratory judgment Under the Clean Air Act payable to the U.S. Treasury to cover the regarding liability for Future Response costs of copying. Costs paid at the Mine Flooding Site; Notice is hereby given that on March and (c) the performance of certain 18, 2002, a proposed Consent Decree in W. Benjamin Fisherow, response actions consistent at the Mine United States v. Ferro Corporation, Civil Deputy Chief, Environmental Enforcement Flooding Site consistent with CERCLA’s Action No. 2:02 CV 115, was lodged Section, Environment and Natural Resources, implementing regulations, which are with the United States District Court for Division. contained in the National Contingency the Northern District of Indiana [FR Doc. 02–8091 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Plan (NCP) at 40 CFR part 300. (Hammond Division). BILLING CODE 4410–15–M
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16124 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE for children of west Anniston that have Attorney General and the Federal Trade learning disabilities or otherwise need Commission disclosing changes in its Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree additional educational services. membership status. The notifications Under the Clean Air Act Under the Decree, the Defendants will were filed for the purpose of extending be required to reimburse the United the Act’s provisions limiting the In accordance with Departmental States for all future oversight costs. recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby Additionally, the Decree requires the damages under specified circumstances. given that on March 25, 2002 a Defendants to provide funding for a Specifically, Alcoa, Alcoa Center, PA proposed Partial Consent Decree in Technical Assistance Plan (‘‘TAP’’). The has acquired Reynolds Metals Company, United States v. Pharmacia Corporation purpose of the TAP is to provide Chester, VA and assumed its (p/k/a Monsanto Company) and Solutia, technical assistance to the community membership in the venture. Also, the Inc., Civil Action No. CV–02–PT–0749– so that the community can play a following member has changed its E was lodged with the United States meaningful role in the RI/FS process. name: Cooperweld, Piqua, OH to LTV District Court for the Northern District The Department of Justice will receive Copperweld, Piqua, OH. In addition, of Alabama. for a period of thirty (30) days from the Hydrodynamics Technologies, Inc., In this action the United States alleges date of this publication comments Auburn Hills, MI has been dropped as that Pharmacia Corporation and Solutia, relating to the proposed Decree. a party to this venture. Inc. (‘‘Defendants’’) are liable under the Comments should be addressed to the No other changes have been made in Comprehensive Environmental Assistant Attorney General for the either the membership or planned Response, Compensation and Liability Environment and Natural Resources activity of the group research project. Act (CERCLA), for injunctive relief in Division, U.S. Department of Justice, Membership in this group research connection with the release of P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044, project remains open, and Auto Body hazardous substances from the and should refer to United States v. Consortium, Inc.: ‘‘Hot Metal Gas Defendants’ manufacturing facility Pharmacia Corporation (p/k/a Forming’’ (‘‘HMGF’’) intends to file located in Anniston, Alabama into the Monsanto Company and Solutia, Inc., additional written notification environment. The United States further D.J. Ref. 90–11–2–07135/1. The disclosing all changes in membership. alleges that the Defendants are liable for proposed Partial Consent Decree may be On December 21, 1998, Auto Body reimbursing the United States for all examined at the Office of the United Consortium, Inc.: ‘‘Hot Metal Gas future response costs incurred in States Attorney, Northern District of Forming’’ (‘‘HMGF’’) filed its original connection with the Anniston PCB Site. Alabama, 1801 4th Avenue, North notification pursuant to section 6(a) of This Partial Consent Decree (hereafter Birmingham, Alabama 35203; and at the Act. The Department of Justice ‘‘Decree’’) requires the Defendants to Region 4, Office of the Environmental published a notice in the Federal provide, in accordance with federal Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the regulations, standards and guidelines, Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Act on February 18, 1999 (64 FR 8124). for a thorough assessment of Georgia 30303. A copy of the proposed The last notification was filed with contamination in and around Anniston, Partial Consent Decree may be obtained the Department on July 31, 2000. A Alabama and to determine the risks that by mail from the Department of Justice notice was published in the Federal such contamination may pose to public Consent Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611, Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the health and the environment. This Washington, DC 20044. In requesting a Act on October 3, 2000 (65 FR 59017). process is called the Remedial copy, please enclose a check in the Constance K. Robinson, Investigation. In addition, the proposed amount of $6.25 (without exhibits), Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. Decree requires the Defendants to $41.50 (with exhibits) (25 cents per page identify methodologies for cleanup of reproduction cost) payable to the [FR Doc. 02–8095 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] the contamination so as to provide the Treasurer of the United States. BILLING CODE 4410–11–M necessary protection of public health and the environment. This process is Ellen M. Mahan, called the Feasibility Study. Ultimately, Assistant Section Chief, Environment and DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE from this process, the U.S. Natural Resources Division. Antitrust Division Environmental Protection Agency [FR Doc. 02–8092 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] (‘‘EPA’’) will select the appropriate BILLING CODE 4410–15–M Notice Pursuant to the National cleanup to ensure protection of public Cooperative Research and Production health and the environment. The costs DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Act of 1993—Portland Cement for the Remedial Investigation and Association Feasibility Study (‘‘RI/FS’’) will be Antitrust Division borne by the Defendants. Notice is hereby given that, on March Under the proposed Decree, the Notice Pursuant to the National 5, 2002, pursuant to section 6(a) of the Defendants will undertake Cooperative Research and Production National Cooperative Research and implementation of the RI/FS. The RI/FS Act of 1993—Auto Body Consortium, Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 includes the Defendants’ manufacturing Inc.: ‘‘Hot Metal Gas Forming ’’ et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Portland Cement facility and all areas where (‘‘HMGF’’) Association has filed written contamination has migrated from the notifications simultaneously with the facility. Notice is hereby given that, on March Attorney General and the Federal Trade In addition, the Decree requires the 8, 2002, pursuant to section 6(a) of the Commission disclosing changes in its Defendants to provide over $3.2 million National Cooperative Research and membership status. The notifications in funding to an education trust fund. Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 were filed for the purpose of extending The trust fund is created under the et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Auto Body the Act’s provisions limiting the proposed Decree for the purpose of Consortium, Inc.: ‘‘Hot Metal Gas recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual providing special education, tutoring, or Forming’’ (‘‘HMGF’’) has filed written damages under specified circumstances. other supplemental educational services notifications simultaneously with the Specifically, National Cement Company
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16125
of California, Encino, CA; National the purpose of extending the Act’s Interkom GmbH & Co., Meunchen, Cement Company of Alabama, provisions limiting the recovery of Germany. Bell Mobility, Mississauga, Birmingham, AL; Eastern Cement antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages Ontario, Canada, has changed its name Corporation, West Palm Beach, FL; and under specified circumstances. to Exomi Oy. BT Cellnet, Slough, United Fuller Bulk Handling, Bethlehem, PA Specifically, the term of the Consortium Kingdom, has changed its name to have resigned from PCA; and Giant has been changed from a term of seven mm02. Cable & Wireless Optus Ltd., Cement Holding, Inc., Summerville, SC years beginning February 27, 1995 to a North Sydney, New South Wales, has become a member. Also, Lehigh term of eight years beginning February Australia, has changed its name to Portland Cement Company, Allentown, 27, 1995. Singtel Optus Ltd. PA has changed its name to Lehigh No other changes have been made in The following companies had their Cement Company; Calaveras Cement either the membership or planned memberships canceled: ActiveSky Inc., Company, Concord, CA has changed its activity of the group research project. San Mateo, CA; Agency.com, London, name to Lehigh Southwest Cement Membership in this group research United Kingdom; Altawave Inc., Company; Tilbury Cement Company, project remains open, and the Fremont, CA; Arch Wireless, Plano, TX; Seattle, WA has changed its name to Consortium intends to file additional CellStar, Carrollton, TX; Centerpost Lehigh Northwest Cement Company; written notification disclosing all Corporation, Chicago, IL; Cherrypicks, Tilbury Cement Limited, Delta, British changes in membership. Hong Kong, Hong Kong-China; Cyber- Columbia, CANADA has changed its On February 28, 1995, the Consortium COMM, Paris, France; FDTI, Lisboa, name to Lehigh Northwest Cement filed its original notification pursuant to Portugal; Handsky Technology Limited, Limited; and Svedala Industries, Inc., section 6(a) of the Act. The Department Nangjing, People’s Republic of China; York, PA (an Associate Member) has of Justice published a notice in the HelloAsia, Redwood City, CA; changed its name to Metso Minerals. Federal Register pursuant to section HiddenMind Technology, Cary, NC; Hii No other changes have been made in 6(b) of the Act on March 27, 1995 (60 Co., Ltd., Taipei, Taiwan; Hotpalm.com, either the membership or planned FR 15789). Atlanta, GA; Hyperwave, Graz, Austria; activity of the group research project. The last notification was filed with InDiQu, San Diego, CA; Informa Membership in this group research the Department on February 9, 2000 and Telecoms Group, London, United project remains open, and Portland February 26, 2001. A notice was Kingdom; Isovia Inc., Boston, MA; LPG Cement Association intends to file published in the Federal Register Innovations Ltd., Helsinki, Finland; additional written notification pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on MediaSolv.com, Inc., San Jose, CA; disclosing all changes in membership. March 29, 2001 (66 FR 17205). Microband, Inc., New York, NY; On January 7, 1985, Portland Cement Constance K. Robinson, nCipher, Inc., Woburn, MA; NetSanity, Association filed its original notification Inc., Campbell, CA; ome internet Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The communications services AG, Vienna, Department of Justice published a notice [FR Doc. 02–8117 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Austria; Pacific21 Ltd., London, United in the Federal Register pursuant to BILLING CODE 4410–11–M Kingdom; Palm, Inc., Santa Clara, CA; section 6(b) of the Act on February 5, ResQNet.com, Inc., New York, NY; Societe Generale, Paris, France; 1985 (50 FR 5015). DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE The last notification was filed with SurfGold.com, Singapore, Singapore; the Department on January 30, 2002. A Antitrust Division Vicinity Corporation, Sunnyvale, CA; notice has not yet been published in the W–Phone, Inc., San Jose, CA; and Federal Register. Notice Pursuant to the National White.Cell, Inc., Rosh-Haayin, Israel. The following companies have Constance K. Robinson, Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Wireless Application resigned: Adobe Systems Inc., San Jose, Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. Protocol Forum, Ltd. CA; APAS Inc., Tokyo, Japan; Art [FR Doc. 02–8118 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Technology Group, Inc., Cambridge, BILLING CODE 4310–11–M Notice is hereby given that, on MA; Askus AB, Stockholm, Sweden; January 28, 2002, pursuant to section Aspective Limited, Staines, United 6(a) of the National Cooperative Kingdom; Barnes and Noble.com, New DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Research and Production Act of 1993, York, NY; Blue C Internet GmbH, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Vienna, Austria; Civista Limited, Antitrust Division Wireless Application Protocol Forum, Tolworth, United Kingdom; ClientSoft Notice Pursuant to the National Ltd. (‘‘WAP’’), has filed written Inc., Hawthorne, NY; Columbitech AB, Cooperative Research and Production notifications simultaneously with the Stockholm, Sweden; Consafe Infotech Act of 1993—Water Heater Industry Attorney General and the Federal Trade AB, Malmo, Sweden; Dansk Data Joint Research and Development Commission disclosing changes in its Elektronik A/S, Herlev, Denmark; Consortium membership status. The notifications Deutsche Bank AG, Eschborn, Germany; were filed for the purpose of extending Digital Bridges Limited, Fife, Scotland, Notice is hereby given that, on March the Act’s provisions limiting the United Kingdom; Dimon Software, 4, 2002, pursuant to section 6(a) of the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual Reykjavik, Iceland; Edify Corporation, National Cooperative Research and damages under specified circumstances. Santa Clara, CA; Ementor ASA, Oslo, Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 Specifically, Vizzavi, London, United Norway; eWare, Ltd., Dublin, Ireland; et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), the Water Heater Kingdom, has been added as a party to FedEx Corporation, Collierville, TN; Industry Joint Research and this venture. Novell, Inc., San Jose, CA, HiQ International, Stockholm, Sweden; Development Consortium (‘‘the has acquired Cambridge Technology Infocomm Inc., Taipei, Taiwan; Consortium’’) has filed written Partners, Inc., Cambridge, MA. Orange Intergraph Corporation, Inc., Huntsville, notifications simultaneously with the Communications, Lausanne, AL; Intershop Communications GmbH, Attorney General and the Federal Trade Switzerland, has acquired France Hamburg, Germany; KPMG Consulting, Commission disclosing an extension of Telecom, Paris, France. mm02, Slough, Inc., McLean, VA; Melody Interactive its term. The notifications were filed for United Kingdom, has acquired VIAG Solutions AB, Stockholm, Sweden;
VerDate 11
Mgage Systems AB, Stockholm, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice, write to the Life Cycle Sweden; MobileRAIN Technologies, meeting will be open to the public up Management Division (NWML), Inc., Union City, Ca; New Media to the seating capacity of the National Archives and Records Science/Linne Group, Oslo, Norway; teleconferencing room. The agenda for Administration (NARA), 8601 Adelphi Nortel Networks, Richardson, TX; the meeting is as follows: Review Road, College Park, MD 20740–6001. PhoneDo Networks Inc., Herzliya, Israel; application for Media Patron Program. Requests also may be transmitted by Pivotal Corporation, North Vancouver, It is imperative that the meeting be FAX to 301–713–6852 or by e-mail to British Columbia, Canada; Quinary, held on this date to accommodate the [email protected]. Requesters must SpA, Milan, Italy; Radio Frequency scheduling priorities of the key cite the control number, which appears Investigation Ltd., Hants, United participants. in parentheses after the name of the Kingdom; Ubiquity S.r.l., Milan, Italy; Dated: March 27, 2002. agency which submitted the schedule, and Virtual, Inc., Taipei, Taiwan. Sylvia K. Kraemer, and must provide a mailing address. No other changes have been made in Advisory Committee Management Officer, Those who desire appraisal reports either the membership or planned National Aeronautics and Space should so indicate in their request. activity of the group research project. Administration. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Membership in this group research [FR Doc. 02–8089 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Marie Allen, Director, Life Cycle project remains open, and WAP intends BILLING CODE 7510–01–P Management Division (NWML), to file additional written notifications National Archives and Records disclosing all changes in membership. Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road, On March 18, 1998, WAP filed its NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS College Park, MD 20740–6001. original notification pursuant to section ADMINISTRATION Telephone: (301) 713–7110. E-mail: 6(a) of the Act. The Department of [email protected]. Justice published a notice in the Federal Records Schedules; Availability and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each year Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Request for Comments Federal agencies create billions of Act on December 31, 1998 (63 FR AGENCY: National Archives and Records records on paper, film, magnetic tape, 72333). and other media. To control this The last notification was filed with Administration (NARA). ACTION: Notice of availability of accumulation, agency records managers the Department on November 20, 2001. prepare schedules proposing retention A notice for this filing has not yet been proposed records schedules; request for comments. periods for records and submit these published in the Federal Register. schedules for NARA’s approval, using Constance K. Robinson, SUMMARY: The National Archives and the Standard Form (SF) 115, Request for Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. Records Administration (NARA) Records Disposition Authority. These [FR Doc. 02–8116 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] publishes notice at least once monthly schedules provide for the timely transfer of certain Federal agency requests for into the National Archives of BILLING CODE 4410–11–M records disposition authority (records historically valuable records and schedules). Once approved by NARA, authorize the disposal of all other records schedules provide mandatory records after the agency no longer needs NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND instructions on what happens to records them to conduct its business. Some SPACE ADMINISTRATION when no longer needed for current schedules are comprehensive and cover Government business. They authorize all the records of an agency or one of its [Notice (02–047)] the preservation of records of major subdivisions. Most schedules, continuing value in the National however, cover records of only one U.S. Centennial of Flight Commission Archives of the United States and the office or program or a few series of AGENCY: National Aeronautics and destruction, after a specified period, of records. Many of these update Space Administration. records lacking administrative, legal, previously approved schedules, and research, or other value. Notice is ACTION: Notice of meeting. some include records proposed as published for records schedules in permanent. SUMMARY: In accordance with the which agencies propose to destroy No Federal records are authorized for Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public records not previously authorized for destruction without the approval of the Law 92–463, as amended, the National disposal or reduce the retention period Archivist of the United States. This Aeronautics and Space Administration of records already authorized for approval is granted only after a announces a teleconference meeting of disposal. NARA invites public thorough consideration of their the U.S. Centennial of Flight comments on such records schedules, as administrative use by the agency of Commission. required by 44 U.S.C. 3303a(a). origin, the rights of the Government and DATES: Requests for copies must be of private persons directly affected by DATES: Wednesday, April 10, 2002, 3 received in writing on or before May 20, the Government’s activities, and p.m. to 4 p.m. 2002. Once the appraisal of the records whether or not they have historical or ADDRESSES: This meeting will be is completed, NARA will send a copy of other value. conducted via teleconference; hence the schedule. NARA staff usually Besides identifying the Federal participation will require contacting Ms. prepare appraisal memorandums that agencies and any subdivisions Beverly Farmarco at 202/358–1903 contain additional information requesting disposition authority, this before 12 noon Eastern, April 8, 2002, concerning the records covered by a public notice lists the organizational leaving your name, affiliation, and proposed schedule. These, too, may be unit(s) accumulating the records or phone number. requested and will be provided once the indicates agency-wide applicability in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. appraisal is completed. Requesters will the case of schedules that cover records Beverly Farmarco, Code I–2, National be given 30 days to submit comments. that may be accumulated throughout an Aeronautics and Space Administration, ADDRESSES: To request a copy of any agency. This notice provides the control Washington, DC 20546, 202/358–1903. records schedule identified in this number assigned to each schedule, the
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16127
total number of schedule items, and the proposed disposition instructions to any committees, boards, and working groups number of temporary items (the records recordkeeping medium. for which the office serves as secretariat. proposed for destruction). It also 4. Department of Defense, Defense 8. Department of State, Bureau of includes a brief description of the Contract Audit Agency (N1–372–02–3, 3 Political-Military Affairs (N1–59–01–24, temporary records. The records items, 3 temporary items). Records 20 items, 17 temporary items). Files schedule itself contains a full pertaining to leased office equipment accumulated by the Assistant Secretary description of the records at the file unit that are used to determine payments and Deputy Assistant Secretaries, level as well as their disposition. If due vendors. Included are statistical including such records as electronic NARA staff has prepared an appraisal reports provided to commercial tracking systems for correspondence, memorandum for the schedule, it too concerns and electronic copies of schedules of daily activities, includes information about the records. documents created using electronic mail congressional inquiries, reference copies Further information about the and word processing. of National Security Directives, and disposition process is available on 5. Department of Defense, Defense copies of documents with special request. Information Systems Agency (N1–371– restrictions. Also included are 02–3, 3 items, 3 temporary items). electronic copies of documents created Schedules Pending Communications security using electronic mail and word 1. Department of the Air Force, administrative files. Included are processing. Proposed for permanent Agency-wide (N1–AFU–02–3, 81 items, correspondence, messages, and other retention are recordkeeping copies of 81 temporary items). Electronic versions facilitative records relating to measures chronological and program files of the of temporary records relating to supply taken to protect telecommunications Assistant Secretary, Deputy Assistant and transportation matters. Included are from unauthorized access. Also Secretaries, and other front office electronic copies of documents created included are electronic copies of principals as well as a finding aid to the using electronic mail and word documents created using electronic mail chronological files. processing as well as electronic records and word processing. 9. Department of the Treasury, Bureau 6. Department of Energy, Southeastern that supplement or replace paper of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (N1– Power Administration (N1–388–00–01, records already approved for disposal. 436–01–1, 4 items, 4 temporary items). 100 items, 68 temporary items). Records relate to such matters as Alcohol label applications records Comprehensive records schedule property accountability, inventory including applications, approvals, covering files of the Office of the management, warehouse space denials, and related papers. Also Administrator, Legal Affairs, the planning, motor vehicle operation and included are electronic copies of Division of Finance and Marketing, the maintenance, cargo and passenger documents created using electronic mail Division of Power Operations, and the and word processing. manifests, and the packaging, handling, Division of Human Resources and 10. Department of the Treasury, and inspection of shipped property. Administration. Records proposed for International Financial Institutions 2. Department of the Air Force, disposal include such file series as Advisory Commission (N1–220–02–12, Agency-wide (N1–AFU–02–4, 120 general correspondence, administrative 5 items, 2 temporary items). Electronic items, 120 temporary items). Electronic files, recurring reports, power contracts, copies of records created using versions of temporary records relating to geological studies, daily operating logs, electronic mail and word processing. member services, public affairs billing invoices, routine audits, and Proposed for permanent retention are activities, and information management. conference planning materials. Also recordkeeping copies of such files as Included are electronic copies of included are electronic copies of correspondence, hearing records, and documents created using electronic mail documents created using electronic mail reports, including the Commission’s and word processing as well as and word processing. Proposed for report to Congress. electronic records that supplement or permanent retention are recordkeeping 11. Department of the Treasury, replace paper records already approved copies of such files as the International Monetary Fund Advisory for disposal. Records relate to such administrator’s correspondence files, Committee (N1–220–02–13, 3 items, 2 matters as clubs and recreational meeting minutes, legal policies, power temporary items). Electronic copies of activities, library administration, child marketing and management policies, records created using electronic mail care operations, cemeteries and burials, legislative history case files, budget and word processing. Recordkeeping food services, laundry and dry cleaning histories, engineering studies, speeches, copies of correspondence files are operations, non-appropriated fund press releases, significant photographs, proposed for permanent retention. financial and personnel administration, audio-visual recordings, and 12. National Archives and Records Air Force news media, office publications. Administration, Agency-wide (N1–64– administration, reprographics, records 7. Department of State, Bureau of 02–1, 9 items, 6 temporary items). management, the Privacy Act program, Intelligence and Research (N1–59–01– Administrative planning records for and mail, publications, and forms 15, 28 items, 15 temporary items). professional and scholarly conferences, management. Records of the Office of Intelligence symposia, ceremonies, and events. 3. Department of the Army, Agency- Resources relating to committees, Included are electronic copies of records wide (N1–AU–02–7, 2 items, 2 boards, and working groups on which created using electronic mail and word temporary items). Records relating to office staff serve as members only. Also processing. Proposed for permanent non-appropriated fund employee job included are electronic copies of retention are recordkeeping copies of descriptions. Included are master job documents created using electronic mail such records as program proceedings descriptions, job standards, and similar and word processing. Proposed for and video and audio recordings of information used in the analysis, permanent retention are recordkeeping conferences and symposia. development, and evaluation of specific copies of files relating to such matters 13. National Archives and Records jobs. Also included are electronic copies as foreign intelligence relationships, Administration, Agency-wide (N1–64– of documents created using electronic signals intelligence, intelligence 02–7, 2 items, 2 temporary items). User mail and word processing. The schedule collection activities, intelligence logs and system audit data for research also authorizes the agency to apply the sharing, and the activities of room personal computers.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16128 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
14. National Archives and Records NUCLEAR REGULATORY longer term security enhancements to Administration, Agency-wide (N1–64– COMMISSION the site. The Commission has now 02–8, 1 item, 1 temporary item). Routine determined that certain compensatory [Docket No. 40–3392, License No. SUB–526, measures should be required to be requests for information, forms, and EA 02–025] publications for which no research is implemented by the licensee as prudent, required for reply. Honeywell International, Inc., interim measures to address the current threat. Therefore, the Commission is 15. National Credit Union Metropolis Works Facility, Metropolis, Illinois; Order Modifying License; imposing interim requirements, set forth Administration, Office of Strategic 1 (Effective Immediately) in Attachment 1 of this Order, which Planning (N1–413–02–3, 4 items, 3 supplement existing regulatory temporary items). Files relating to the I requirements, to provide the Government Performance and Results Commission with reasonable assurance Act, including such records as Honeywell International, Inc. (‘‘Honeywell’’ or the ‘‘licensee’’) holds that the public health and safety and correspondence, plans, distribution Materials License No. SUB–526, issued common defense and security continue lists, planning schedules, semi-annual by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory to be adequately protected in the current performance plans, audits/reviews, Commission (NRC or Commission) threat environment. This order supercedes the Confirmatory Action background papers, and other authorizing the licensee to receive, Letter of December 21, 2001. These administrative records. Also included acquire, possess and transfer byproduct requirements will remain in effect are electronic copies of documents and source material in accordance with pending notification from the created using electronic mail and word the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and 10 Commission that a significant change in processing. Proposed for permanent CFR parts 30 and 40. Commission the threat environment occurs, or until retention are recordkeeping copies of regulations at 10 CFR 20.1801, require the Commission determines that other strategic plans, annual performance the licensee to secure licensed material changes are needed following a plans, annual operating plans, and from unauthorized removal or access comprehensive re-evaluation of current annual performance reports. from controlled or unrestricted areas. safeguards and security programs. Further, License Condition 10 of 16. National Credit Union The Commission recognizes that some Materials License No. SUB–526, as Administration, Office of General of the requirements set forth in amended, requires that the licensee Counsel (N1–413–02–4, 10 items, 6 Attachment 1 2 to this Order may implement and maintain specific temporary items). Records relating to already have been initiated by measures to control public and private litigation and administrative hearings. Honeywell in response to previously access to the facility as described in the Also included are electronic copies of issued advisories, Confirmatory Action October 1, 1998 enclosure to its documents accumulated by the Office of Letter No. RIII–01–005, or on its own. It application dated September 23, 1998. General Counsel created using is also recognized that some measures electronic mail and word processing. II may need to be tailored to specifically Records proposed for permanent On September 11, 2001, terrorists accommodate the specific retention include recordkeeping copies simultaneously attacked targets in New circumstances and characteristics of legal opinions, Freedom of York, NY, and Washington, DC, existing at the licensee’s facility to Information Act reports, and rulemaking utilizing large commercial aircraft as achieve the intended objectives and files. weapons. In response to the attacks and avoid any unforeseen effect on safe intelligence information subsequently operation. And, although the licensee’s 17. National Credit Union response to the Safeguards and Threat Administration, Office of Corporate obtained, the Commission issued a number of Safeguards and Threat Advisories and the December 21, 2001 Credit Unions (N1–413–02–5, 5 items, 3 Confirmatory Action Letter has been temporary items). Inputs and outputs for Advisories to its licensees in order to strengthen licensees’ capabilities and adequate to provide reasonable an electronic system relating to credit assurance of adequate protection of union supervision, examination, and readiness to respond to a potential attack on a nuclear facility. The public health and safety, the insurance activities. The electronic data Commission believes that the response is proposed for permanent retention Commission has also communicated with other Federal, State and local must be supplemented because the along with the related system government agencies and industry current threat environment has documentation. representatives to discuss and evaluate persisted longer than expected and as a Dated: March 29, 2002. the current threat environment in order result, it is appropriate to require certain to assess the adequacy of security security measures so that they are Michael J. Kurtz, maintained within the established Assistant Archivist for Record Services— measures at licensed facilities. In addition, the Commission has regulatory framework. Thus, in order to Washington, DC. provide assurance that the licensee is [FR Doc. 02–8127 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] commenced a comprehensive review of its safeguards and security programs implementing prudent measures to BILLING CODE 7515–01–P and requirements. achieve a consistent level of protection As a result of its initial consideration to address the current threat of current safeguards and security plan environment, Materials License No. requirements, as well as a review of 1 Attachment 1 contains SAFEGUARDS information provided by the intelligence information and will not be released to the public. community, the Commission issued a 2 To the extent that specific measures identified Confirmatory Action Letter, No. RIII– in Attachment 1 to this Order require actions 01–005, dated December 21, 2001, to pertaining to the Licensee’s possession and use of chemicals, such actions are being directed on the Honeywell, confirming the Licensee’s basis of the potential impact of such chemicals on agreement to immediately implement radioactive materials and activities subject to NRC enhanced security measures and review regulation.
VerDate 11
SUB–526 is modified to include the each requirement described in General Counsel for Materials Litigation requirements identified in Attachment 1 Attachment 1. and Enforcement, at the same address, to this Order. In addition, pursuant to 2. The Licensee shall report to the to the Regional Administrator, NRC 10 CFR 2.202, I find that, in the Commission, when it has achieved full Region III, 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, circumstances described above, the compliance with the requirements Illinois 60532, and to the Licensee if the public health, safety and interest require described in Attachment 1. answer or hearing request is by a person that this Order be immediately effective. D. Notwithstanding any provision of other than the Licensee. If a person the Commission’s regulations to the other than the Licensee requests a III contrary, all measures implemented or hearing, that person shall set forth with Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 63, actions taken in response to this Order 81, 161b, 161i, 161o, 182 and 186 of the shall be maintained pending particularity the manner in which his Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, notification from the Commission that a interest is adversely affected by this and the Commission’s regulations in 10 significant change in the threat Order and shall address the criteria set CFR 2.202 and 10 CFR parts 30 and 40, environment occurs, or until the forth in 10 CFR 2.714(d). It is hereby ordered, effective Commission determines that other If a hearing is requested by the immediately, that Materials License No. changes are needed following a Licensee or a person whose interest is SUB–526 is modified as follows: comprehensive re-evaluation of current adversely affected, the Commission will A. The Licensee shall, safeguards and security programs. issue an Order designating the time and notwithstanding the provisions of any Licensee responses to Conditions B.1, place of any hearing. If a hearing is held, Commission regulation or license to the B.2, C.1, and C.2, above shall be the issue to be considered at such contrary, comply with the requirements submitted in accordance with 10 CFR hearing shall be whether this Order described in Attachment 1 to this Order. 30.6 and 40.5. In addition, Licensee should be sustained. The Licensee shall immediately start submittals that contain Safeguards implementation of the requirements in Information shall be properly marked Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), the Attachment 1 to the Order and shall and handled in accordance with 10 CFR Licensee, may, in addition to complete implementation no later than 73.21. demanding a hearing, at the time the July 1, 2002. The Director, Office of Nuclear answer is filed or sooner, move the B. 1. The Licensee shall, within Material Safety and Safeguards, may, in presiding officer to set aside the twenty (20) days of the date of this writing, modify, relax or rescind any of immediate effectiveness of the Order on Order, notify the Commission, (1) if it is the above conditions upon the ground that the Order, including the unable to comply with any of the demonstration by the Licensee of good need for immediate effectiveness, is not requirements described in Attachment cause. based on adequate evidence but on mere 1, (2) if compliance with any of the IV suspicion, unfounded allegations, or requirements is unnecessary in its error. specific circumstances, or (3) if In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, the implementation of any of the Licensee must, and any other person In the absence of any request for requirements would cause the Licensee adversely affected by this Order may, hearing, or written approval of an to be in violation of the provisions of submit an answer to this Order, and extension of time in which to request a any Commission regulation or the may request a hearing on this Order, hearing, the provisions specified in facility license. The notification shall within 20 days of the date of this Order. Section III above shall be final 20 days provide the Licensee’s justification for Where good cause is shown, from the date of this Order without seeking relief from or variation of any consideration will be given to extending further order or proceedings. If an specific requirement. the time to request a hearing. A request extension of time for requesting a 2. If the Licensee considers that for extension of time in which to submit hearing has been approved, the implementation of any of the an answer or request a hearing must be provisions specified in Section III shall requirements described in Attachment 1 made in writing to the Director, Office be final when the extension expires if a to this Order would adversely impact of Nuclear Material Safety and hearing request has not been received. safe operation of the facility, the Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory An answer or a request for hearing shall Licensee must notify the Commission, Commission, Washington, DC 20555, not stay the immediate effectiveness of and include a statement of good cause within twenty (20) days of this Order, of this order. the adverse safety impact, the basis for for the extension. The answer may its determination that the requirement consent to this Order. Unless the answer Dated this 29th day of March, 2002. has an adverse safety impact, and either consents to this Order, the answer shall, For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. a proposal for achieving the same in writing and under oath or Martin J. Virgilio, objectives specified in the Attachment 1 affirmation, specifically set forth the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety requirement in question, or a schedule matters of fact and law on which the and Safeguards. Licensee or other person adversely for modifying the facility to address the [FR Doc. 02–8139 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] adverse safety condition. If neither affected relies and the reasons as to why approach is appropriate, the Licensee the Order should not have been issued. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P must supplement its response to Any answer or request for a hearing Condition B1 of this Order to identify shall be submitted to the Secretary, U.S. the condition as a requirement with Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Attn: which it cannot comply, with attendant Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, justifications as required in Condition Washington, DC 20555. Copies also B1. shall be sent to the Director, Office of C. 1. The Licensee shall, within Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, twenty (20) days of the date of this and the Director, Office of Enforcement, Order, submit to the Commission, a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, schedule for achieving compliance with Washington, DC 20555, to the Assistant
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16130 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
NUCLEAR REGULATORY Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.91(a)(6) for These proposed changes do not involve a COMMISSION amendments to be granted under physical alteration of the plant (no new or exigent circumstances, the NRC staff different type of equipment will be installed) [Docket No. 50–285] must determine that the amendment or change the methods governing plant operation. The proposed change does not Omaha Public Power District; Notice of request involves no significant hazards involve any physical changes to plant Consideration of Issuance of consideration. Under the Commission’s systems, structures or components (SSCs) or Amendment to Facility Operating regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means the manner in which these SSCs are License, Proposed No Significant that operation of the facility in operated, maintained, modified or inspected. Hazards Consideration Determination, accordance with the proposed Therefore, these changes do not create the and Opportunity for a Hearing amendment would not (1) involve a possibility of a new or different kind of significant increase in the probability or accident from any accident previously The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory consequences of an accident previously evaluated. Commission (the Commission) is evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of The proposed change does not involve a considering issuance of an amendment significant reduction in a margin of safety. a new or different kind of accident from The most risk significant portion of the to Facility Operating License No. DPR– any accident previously evaluated; or 40, issued to Omaha Public Power Recirculation Actuation Logic Channel (3) involve a significant reduction in a Functional Test is the opening of the District (the licensee), for operation of margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR recirculation minimum flow valve within the Fort Calhoun Station, Unit 1 (FCS) 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its three minutes of the receipt of a RAS located in Washington County, analysis of the issue of no significant [recirculation actuation signal] signal in Nebraska. hazards consideration, which is order to prevent damage to the HPSI pumps. The proposed amendment would add presented below: The manual actions have been determined to an exception to the technical be acceptable and does not result in a specifications to perform the The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in any margin of safety. surveillance test of Table 3–2, Item 20 significant increase in the probability or The bounding risk for the test is an consequences of an accident previously (Recirculation Actuation Logic Channel Incremental Core Damage Probability (ICDP) evaluated. of approximately 6.2E–09 for the 30 minutes Functional Test) under administrative Allowing performance of the quarterly controls while components in excess of during which the RAS portion of the test is surveillance test of Table 3–2, Item 20 performed. The proposed change does not those allowed by Conditions a, b, d, and (Recirculation Actuation Logic Channel affect the frequency of the Recirculation e of Technical Specification (TS) 2.3(2) Functional Test) under administrative Actuation Logic Channel Functional Test. are inoperable provided they are controls while components in excess of those The administrative controls in place will returned to operable status within one allowed by Conditions a, b, d, and e of ensure that all required ECCS components Technical Specification (TS) 2.3(2) are hour. This exception will apply only to remain available. The minimum numbers of inoperable provided they are returned to ECCS components required by the FCS the remainder of Cycle 20 and the operable status within one hour will not accident analyses remain available with entirety of Cycle 21. affect the probability of any accident since compensatory dedicated operators. The During the NRC Safety System Design the performance of the Recirculation and Performance Capability (SSDPC) Actuation Logic Channel Functional Test is proposed change will not significantly inspection in February 2002, station not identified as the initiator of any analyzed impact the availability or reliability of the plants systems or their ability to respond to personnel were informed that manual event. This allowance applies only to the remaining portion of Cycle 20 and all of plant transients and accidents. The one hour operator actions could not be used in completion time allowed to satisfy ECCS lieu of automatic actions to maintain Cycle 21. The proposed change will still require that the surveillance test be requirements is acceptable based on the equipment operable without prior NRC performed and the required ECCS small probability of an event occurring approval. A comprehensive review was [emergency core cooling system] systems to during this time interval that the test is conducted of plant procedures that used be available. The one hour completion time performed, and the desire to minimize plant manual actions in place of automatic is considered sufficient time to perform the shutdown transients. The performance of this actions in order to allow equipment to quarterly Recirculation Actuation Logic activity has no affect on any accident remain operable. The quarterly Channel Functional Test. Additionally, the scenario. Therefore, the proposed changes do Recirculation Actuation Logic Channel one hour completion time ensures that not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Functional Test was identified as one of prompt action is taken to restore the required ECCS capacity. The administrative controls The NRC staff has reviewed the the tests affected. The licensee in place will ensure that all required ECCS determined on March 26, 2002, that the components remain available with licensee’s analysis and, based on this surveillance could not be performed compensatory dedicated operators. Closure of review, it appears that the three without a technical specification the recirculation minimum flow valves standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are change, as there was insufficient time to during testing could adversely affect all HPSI satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff make a modification to allow the [high pressure safety injection], LPSI [low proposes to determine that the performance of the test online without pressure safety injection] and CS amendment request involves no taking credit for operator action. This [containment spray] pumps. However, significant hazards consideration. manual operator actions serve to minimize The Commission is seeking public test was due to be performed on March the probability of this occurring and risk 21, 2002, and will exceed its analysis concludes that the risk of this is comments on this proposed surveillance frequency and extension on small. This change will not alter assumptions determination. Any comments received April 21, 2002. Therefore, OPPD has relative to the mitigation of an accident or within 14 days after the date of requested an exigent TS change to allow transient event. The performance of this publication of this notice will be this surveillance to be performed to activity has no affect on any accident considered in making any final avoid shutting down the plant. scenario. Therefore, the proposed change determination. Before issuance of the proposed does not involve a significant increase in the Normally, the Commission will not license amendment, the Commission consequences of an accident previously issue the amendment until the evaluated. will have made findings required by the The proposed change does not create the expiration of the 14-day notice period. Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended possibility of a new or different kind of However, should circumstances change (the Act) and the Commission’s accident from any accident previously during the notice period, such that regulations. evaluated. failure to act in a timely way would
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16131
result, for example, in derating or Board will issue a notice of hearing or limitations in the order granting leave to shutdown of the facility, the an appropriate order. intervene, and have the opportunity to Commission may issue the license As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a participate fully in the conduct of the amendment before the expiration of the petition for leave to intervene shall set hearing, including the opportunity to 14-day notice period, provided that its forth with particularity the interest of present evidence and cross-examine final determination is that the the petitioner in the proceeding, and witnesses. amendment involves no significant how that interest may be affected by the If the amendment is issued before the hazards consideration. The final results of the proceeding. The petition expiration of the 30-day hearing period, determination will consider all public should specifically explain the reasons the Commission will make a final and State comments received. Should why intervention should be permitted determination on the issue of no the Commission take this action, it will with particular reference to the significant hazards consideration. If a publish in the Federal Register a notice following factors: (1) The nature of the hearing is requested, the final of issuance. The Commission expects petitioner’s right under the Act to be determination will serve to decide when that the need to take this action will made a party to the proceeding; (2) the the hearing is held. occur very infrequently. nature and extent of the petitioner’s If the final determination is that the Written comments may be submitted property, financial, or other interest in amendment request involves no by mail to the Chief, Rules and the proceeding; and (3) the possible significant hazards consideration, the Directives Branch, Division of effect of any order which may be Commission may issue the amendment Administrative Services, Office of entered in the proceeding on the and make it immediately effective, Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory petitioner’s interest. The petition should notwithstanding the request for a Commission, Washington, DC 20555– also identify the specific aspect(s) of the hearing. Any hearing held would take 0001, and should cite the publication subject matter of the proceeding as to place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the date and page number of this Federal which petitioner wishes to intervene. amendment request involves a Register notice. Written comments may Any person who has filed a petition for significant hazards consideration, any also be delivered to Room 6D59, Two leave to intervene or who has been hearing held would take place before White Flint North, 11545 Rockville admitted as a party may amend the the issuance of any amendment. Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 petition without requesting leave of the Board up to 15 days prior to the first A request for a hearing or a petition a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. for leave to intervene must be filed with Documents may be examined, and/or prehearing conference scheduled in the proceeding, but such an amended the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Document Room, located at One White petition must satisfy the specificity requirements described above. Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first Not later than 15 days prior to the first Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, or floor), Rockville, Maryland. prehearing conference scheduled in the may be delivered to the Commission’s The filing of requests for hearing and proceeding, a petitioner shall file a Public Document Room, located at One petitions for leave to intervene is supplement to the petition to intervene White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike discussed below. which must include a list of the (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, by the By May 6, 2002, the licensee may file contentions which are sought to be above date. A copy of the petition a request for a hearing with respect to litigated in the matter. Each contention should also be sent to the Office of the issuance of the amendment to the must consist of a specific statement of General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear subject facility operating license and the issue of law or fact to be raised or Regulatory Commission, Washington, any person whose interest may be controverted. In addition, the petitioner DC 20555–0001, and to James R. Curtiss, affected by this proceeding and who shall provide a brief explanation of the Esq., Winstron & Strawn, 1400 L Street, wishes to participate as a party in the bases of the contention and a concise NW., Washington, DC 20005–3502, proceeding must file a written request statement of the alleged facts or expert attorney for the licensee. for a hearing and a petition for leave to opinion which support the contention Nontimely filings of petitions for intervene. Requests for a hearing and a and on which the petitioner intends to leave to intervene, amended petitions, petition for leave to intervene shall be rely in proving the contention at the supplemental petitions and/or requests filed in accordance with the hearing. The petitioner must also for hearing will not be entertained Commission’s ‘‘Rules of Practice for provide references to those specific absent a determination by the Domestic Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10 sources and documents of which the Commission, the presiding officer or the CFR part 2. Interested persons should petitioner is aware and on which the presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714, petitioner intends to rely to establish Board that the petition and/or request which is available at the Commission’s those facts or expert opinion. Petitioner should be granted based upon a Public Document Room, located at One must provide sufficient information to balancing of the factors specified in 10 White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike show that a genuine dispute exists with CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d). (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, and the applicant on a material issue of law For further details with respect to this available electronically on the Internet or fact. Contentions shall be limited to action, see the application for at the NRC Web site http://www.nrc.gov/ matters within the scope of the amendment dated April 1, 2002, which reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a amendment under consideration. The is available for public inspection at the request for a hearing or petition for contention must be one which, if Commission’s Public Document Room leave to intervene is filed by the above proven, would entitle the petitioner to (PDR), located at One White Flint North, date, the Commission or an Atomic relief. A petitioner who fails to file such 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Safety and Licensing Board, designated a supplement which satisfies these Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available by the Commission or by the Chairman requirements with respect to at least one records will be accessible electronically of the Atomic Safety and Licensing contention will not be permitted to from the Agencywide Documents Board Panel, will rule on the request participate as a party. Access and Management System and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Those permitted to intervene become (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading designated Atomic Safety and Licensing parties to the proceeding, subject to any Room on the Internet at the NRC web
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16132 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
site http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ this date will be considered if practical this would result in an increased adams.html. Persons who do not have to do so, but the Commission is able to temperature in the water being released access to ADAMS or who encounter assure consideration for only those into the Atlantic Ocean. problems in accessing the documents comments received on or before May 6, The Need for the Proposed Action located in ADAMS, should contact the 2002. CP&L forecasts a 40-percent increase NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone ADDRESSES: Submit written comments at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737 or to Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, in the demand for electrical power by by e-mail to [email protected]. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2015 in its service area in North Carolina and South Carolina. CP&L can Mail Stop T 6 D–69, Washington, DC Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day meet this projected increase in power of April, 2002. 20555–0001. Written comments may demand by increasing the number of also be delivered to 11545 Rockville For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. natural gas-fired combustion turbines or Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, from Alan Wang, by purchasing power from other 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. on Federal Project Manager, Section 2, Project sources. The cost of adding the workdays. Copies of written comments Directorate IV, Division of Licensing Project additional generating capacity at BSEP received will be available electronically Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor is roughly equivalent to the cost of at the NRC’s Electronic Reading Room Regulation. constructing several small combustion link (http://www.nrc.gov/reading- [FR Doc. 02–8241 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] turbine units, each producing rm.html) on the NRC home page or at BILLING CODE 7590–01–P approximately 50 Megawatts-electrical the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) (MWe). The proposed EPU would located at One White Flint North, 11555 increase the electrical output for BSEP NUCLEAR REGULATORY Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Unit 1 from 841 MWe to 958 MWe and COMMISSION Maryland. for BSEP Unit 2 from 835 MWe to 951 [Docket Nos. 50–325 and 50–324] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MWe. However, the cost of nuclear Brenda Mozafari, Office of Nuclear power generation is approximately one Carolina Power & Light Company, Reactor Regulation, Mail Stop O 8 G–9, third of the cost of natural gas power Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, generation. Therefore, the proposed EPU 1 and 2; Draft Environmental Washington, DC 20555–0001, by would increase power production Assessment and Finding of No telephone at (301) 415–2020, or by e- capacity at a lower economic cost than Significant Impact Related to a mail at [email protected]. the fossil fuel alternatives, such as Proposed License Amendment To SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NRC natural gas, and would not result in Increase the Maximum Rated Thermal is considering issuance of an additional land disturbances or other Power Level amendment to Facility Operating environmental impacts that could result from new plant construction. AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory License Nos. DPR–71 and DPR–62, Commission (NRC). issued to CP&L for the operation of Environmental Impacts of the Proposed BSEP, Units 1 and 2, located in ACTION: Notice of opportunity for public Action Brunswick County, North Carolina. comment. At the time of issuance of the Environmental Assessment operating licenses for BSEP, the NRC SUMMARY: The NRC has prepared a draft staff noted that any activity authorized Identification of the Proposed Action environmental assessment of a request by the license for each unit would be by Carolina Power & Light Company By letter dated August 9, 2001, CP&L encompassed by the overall action (CP&L or the licensee) for a license proposed an amendment to the evaluated in the Final Environmental amendment to increase the maximum operating licenses for BSEP, Units 1 and Statement (FES) for the operation of thermal power level at Brunswick Steam 2, to increase the maximum thermal BSEP, which was issued in January Electric Plant (BSEP), Units 1 and 2, power level by approximately 15 1974. The original operating licenses from 2558 megawatts thermal (MWt) to percent, from 2558 MWt to 2923 MWt. allowed a maximum reactor power of 2923 MWt, which is a power increase of The change is considered an EPU 2436 MWt. CP&L was granted 14.3 percent (approximately 15 percent). because it would raise the reactor core amendments to the BSEP licenses to As stated in the NRC staff’s February 8, power level more than 7 percent above increase maximum reactor power level 1996, position paper on the Boiling- the original licensed maximum power by approximately 5 percent on Water Reactor Extended Power Uprate level. The original licensed maximum November 1, 1996. The NRC staff Program, the staff has the option of power level was 2436 MWt, and the published an Environmental preparing an environmental impact NRC staff approved an increase in the Assessment and Finding of No statement if it believes an extended licensed maximum power level to 2558 Significant Impact in support of this power uprate (EPU) will have MWt (approximately 5 percent increase) uprate in the Federal Register on significant impact on the human on November 1, 1996. This increase in October 28,1996 (61 FR 55673). As part environment. The staff did not identify power was implemented at BSEP in of the application dated August 9, 2001, a significant impact from the EPU at 1997. Therefore, this proposed action CP&L submitted a supplement to the BSEP Units 1 and 2; therefore, the NRC would result in an increase of BSEP Environmental Report supporting staff is documenting its environmental approximately 20 percent over the the proposed EPU and providing a review in an environmental assessment original licensed maximum power level. summary of its conclusions concerning (EA). In accordance with the February 8, The amendment would allow the heat both the radiological and non- 1996, staff position paper, the draft EA output of the reactor to increase, which radiological environmental impacts of and finding of no significant impact is would increase the flow of steam to the the proposed action. Based on the NRC being published in the Federal Register turbine. This would allow the turbine staff’s independent analyses and the with a 30-day public comment period. generator to increase the production of information provided by CP&L, the NRC DATES: The comment period expires power and increase the amount of heat staff concludes that the environmental May 6, 2002. Comments received after dissipated by the condenser. Moreover, impacts of the EPU are bounded by the
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16133
environmental impacts previously plumes carrying chemicals or conducted a study to update evaluated in the FES because the EPU particulate matter have been information about the potential would not involve extensive changes to experienced from these existing cooling existence of sensitive plant and animal plant systems that directly or indirectly towers; therefore, no significant impact species in the plant environs. Two interface with the environment. This EA would be expected from operation of the endangered perennial herbs, rough- summarizes the non-radiological and condensate cooling towers. leaved loosestrife and Cooley’s meadowrue, occur in the BSEP radiological impacts on the environment Transmission Facility Impacts that may result from the proposed transmission line rights-of-way. The amendments. The proposed EPU would not require red-cockaded woodpecker, an any physical modifications to the endangered bird, occurs in the mature Non-Radiological Impacts transmission lines. Increased current pine forests in Brunswick County. The Land Use Impacts would be the only change in design or uprate would not disturb the habitat for operation of the transmission lines any of these species, and CP&L has The proposed EPU would not modify needed to support the EPU. CP&L’s instituted measures to protect and the current land use at the site transmission line right-of-way manage the two endangered herbs by significantly over that described in the maintenance practices, including the agreement with the North Carolina FES. Three small mechanical draft management of vegetation growth, Natural Heritage Program. Therefore, no cooling towers would be erected on the would not be affected. No new significant impact on terrestrial biota roof of the radwaste building to service requirements or changes to onsite would be expected from the uprate. the new condensate cooling system. No transmission equipment, operating other expansion of buildings, roads, voltages, or transmission line rights-of- Water Use Impacts parking lots, equipment storage or way would be necessary to support the BSEP uses a once-through cooling laydown areas, or onsite transmission EPU. The main plant transformers will system to remove heat from the reactor and distribution equipment, including be modified and replaced to support the coolant in the condensers. An intake power line rights-of-way, is anticipated uprate; however, replacement of the canal approximately 5 kilometers (km) to support this action. No new transformers would have been required (3 miles) in length feeds water from the construction outside of the existing before the end of plant life as part of the Cape Fear River to the BSEP intake facilities would be necessary. The EPU licensee’s ongoing maintenance structure. The water passes through would not significantly affect material program; therefore, no significant tubes in the condensers removing heat storage, including chemicals, fuels, and environmental impact beyond that from the reactor coolant. Then the water other materials stored aboveground or considered in the FES is expected from passes through a discharge canal 10 km underground. this kind of replacement of onsite (6 miles) in length to Caswell Beach. At Cooling Tower Impacts equipment. Caswell Beach, the water is pumped The increased electrical current approximately 600m (2000 ft) offshore Each of the three new mechanical would cause an increased and discharged at the bottom of the draft cooling towers, which would electromagnetic field around the Atlantic Ocean. service the condensate cooling system, transmission lines, and the potential for The proposed EPU would not involve are approximately 7 meters (m) by 7 m chronic effects from these fields any increase in the rate of withdrawal [24 feet (ft) by 24 ft], with a height of continues to be studied and no scientific of water from the intake canal or the approximately 5 m (16 ft). They will be consensus has been reached. However, Cape Fear River. Makeup water for the installed on the roof of the radwaste since the increase in power level is new condensate cooling system would building at an elevation of approximately 15 percent, the impact of be obtained from the Brunswick County approximately 20 m (64 ft). The cooling exposure to electromagnetic fields from water system; the maximum anticipated towers would not be readily visible the offsite transmission lines would not flow of makeup water would be offsite, so there would be no visual or be expected to increase significantly approximately 23.7 liters per second aesthetic impact. The towers are over the current impact. [375 gallons per minute (gpm)]. CP&L modular in design and construction, The transmission lines are designed consulted with Brunswick County water and a similar kind of construction is and constructed in accordance with the system management officials, who performed onsite during almost every applicable shock prevention provisions indicated that the additional water use refueling outage without noticeable of the National Electric Safety Code. would be well within the capacity of the additional impacts from noise, dust, Therefore, even with the slight increase County water system. Therefore, the odors, vibration, traffic, or vehicle in current attributable to the EPU, uprate would not have a significant exhaust. Therefore, there would be no adequate protection is provided against impact on water usage by BSEP and significant impact from construction of hazards from electrical shock. would not create a water use conflict. the cooling towers. Each cooling tower would be designed to reject a maximum Impacts on Terrestrial Biota Discharge Impacts of approximately 15 MWt (51 million The proposed EPU would not involve Surface water and wastewater BTU/hr). The expected level of noise any land disturbance; all construction discharges at BSEP are regulated by the from operation of a cooling tower fan will be on the roof of the pre-existing State of North Carolina via a National would be 84 dBA at a distance of 1.5 m radwaste building. Also, once Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (5 ft); however, the towers would be construction is completed, the uprate (NPDES) permit. This permit is located on a roof top near the middle of would not increase noise levels outside periodically reviewed and renewed by the protected area. Therefore, no added the plant site or increase the size of the the North Carolina Department of impact from noise is expected offsite. workforce, nor would CP&L’s Environment and Natural Resources Existing cooling towers, similar in transmission line rights-of-way (NCDENR). The EPU would increase the design to the condensate cooling towers, maintenance practices change. temperature of the water discharged to have been in operation for years on the Therefore, the uprate would not disturb the Atlantic Ocean. Also, the blowdown roof of the turbine building at BSEP. No the habitat of any terrestrial plant or from the new cooling towers would be significant fogging, icing, or drifting animal species. In 1998, CP&L piped to the existing storm drain system
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16134 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
and empty into a storm drain basin. the blowdown would be small most commonly collected in the intake Water from the storm drain basin is compared to the volume of the storm canal, although all three of these turtle pumped into a stabilization pond; drain basin, and it would be diluted species have been collected. CP&L discharges from the stabilization pond even further in the stabilization pond employs protective measures, such as flow into the BSEP intake canal. and the intake canal. The blowdown blocker panels in the diversion In 2001, CP&L analyzed the effect of from the existing cooling towers on the structure, to prevent turtles from the proposed EPU on the water roof of the turbine building follows the entering the canal and patrols of the temperatures in the Atlantic Ocean in same discharge path. Therefore, no intake canal to remove turtles. The the area of the BSEP discharge. First, significant additional impact would be National Marine Fisheries Service historical data, such as intake expected from the blowdown (NMFS) reviewed data from BSEP on temperatures, discharge temperatures, discharged from the condensate cooling incidental takes of sea turtles and the plant operating conditions, and system. protective measures employed at BSEP. meteorological conditions, were used to In January 2000, NMFS concluded that develop isothermal distribution maps. Impacts on Aquatic Biota BSEP operation ‘‘is not likely to Then, isothermal distribution maps The flow rate of water being jeopardize the continued existence of were projected using the expected heat withdrawn from the intake canal at the the loggerhead, leatherback, green, rejection rates for the uprate condition. intake structure would not increase, and Based on these analyses, CP&L no change would be made in the design hawksbill, or Kemp’s ridley sea turtles.’’ submitted an application to the of the intake structure screens. Since the withdrawal rate of water from NCDENR for renewal of the BSEP Therefore, no increase in the the intake canal would not increase due NPDES permit with the following entrainment of planktonic organisms or to the EPU and the sea turtles can easily revisions to support the uprate: in the impingement of fish, shellfish, or swim around the small higher- 1. Area of surface water temperature sea turtles would be expected. temperature discharge plume, no increase up to 7 degrees Fahrenheit (F) CP&L has conducted thermal studies increased impact would be expected for [3.9 degrees Celsius (C)] in the plume in the Atlantic Ocean in the vicinity of the sea turtles beyond that considered in extending from the discharge point in the BSEP discharge for over 25 years; no the NMFS Biological Opinion of January the Atlantic Ocean shall not exceed 120 adverse impacts on fish and shellfish 2000. acres [50 hectares (ha)]. The current have been observed. The expected Social and Economic Impacts limit is approximately 60 acres (24 ha). increase in water temperature would be 2. Area of surface water temperature expected to be small and limited to a The NRC staff has reviewed increase up to 1.44 degrees F (0.8 relatively small area in the Brunswick information provided by the licensee degrees C) during June–August [3.96 County coastline. The increase in water regarding socioeconomic impacts. CP&L degrees F (2.2 degrees C) during temperature would not be expected to is a major employer in the community September–May] should not exceed exceed 4 degrees C (7 degrees F) beyond with approximately 750 full-time 2000 acres (800 ha). The current limit is an area of 50 ha (120 acres) at the employees and 235 contract employees. surface, and the increase would not be 1000 acres (400 ha). CP&L is also a major contributor to the expected to exceed 2 degrees C (4 3. Area of bottom water temperature local tax base. CP&L personnel also increase up to 7 degrees F (3.9 degrees degrees F) beyond an area of 800 ha contribute to the tax base by paying C) shall not exceed 4 acres (1.6 ha). The (2000 acres). The affected area would be sales and property taxes. The proposed current limit is 2 acres (0.8 ha). expected to be even smaller near the 4. Bottom water temperature increase bottom. There is no critical habitat in EPU would not significantly affect the shall not exceed 7 degrees F (3.9 degrees the vicinity of the ocean discharge; the size of the BSEP labor force and would C) beyond a distance of 1000 ft (300 m) ocean floor is sandy flats with no have no material effect upon the labor from the discharge point. The current natural features that would attract fish force required for future outages after all limit is 500 ft (150 m). and invertebrates. Some of the more stages of the modifications needed to BSEP has been operating within the abundant organisms (brown shrimp, support the uprate are completed. current limits; therefore, these limits white shrimp, and croaker) in the Because the plant modifications needed represent an upper bound of the current vicinity of the discharge point tolerate to implement the uprate would be impact on ocean water temperatures in temperatures of up to 86 degrees F minor, any increase in sales tax and the vicinity of the discharge. The without experiencing loss of additional revenue to local and national proposed limits to support the uprate equilibrium, and most organisms could business will be negligible relative to similarly represent the expected upper avoid the area of higher water the large tax revenues generated by bound of the impact on ocean water temperature. There is a net westward BSEP. The EPU would increase the temperatures if the uprate were fully drift of the near-shore coastal waters in plant’s equalized assessed value, which implemented. the vicinity of the discharge point; would result in increased tax revenues The maximum blowdown flow from therefore, most larvae would enter the for Brunswick County. It is expected all three condensate cooling towers into estuary from offshore waters to the east that the proposed uprate will reduce the storm drain system would be and would not be expected to be incremental operating costs, enhance approximately 8.2 liters per second (130 affected by the discharge plume. the value of BSEP as a power-generating gpm). Water treatment chemicals would Therefore, the uprate would not be asset, and lower the probability of early be added to the condensate cooling expected to significantly impact aquatic plant retirement. Early plant retirement system—approximately 409 liters (108 biota in the vicinity of BSEP. would be expected to have a significant gallons) per year of ChemTreat CL–216 CP&L’s 1998 study indicated that negative impact on the local economy (a biocide) and approximately 1567 three Federally listed aquatic species and the community as a whole by liters (414 gallons) per year of could be potentially affected by BSEP: reducing tax revenues and limiting local ChemTreat CL–4800 (a dispersant). loggerhead sea turtle (threatened), green employment opportunities, although These chemical additions were included sea turtle (threatened), and Kemp’s these effects could be mitigated by in the application to NCDENR for the ridley sea turtle (endangered). Of the decommissioning activities in the short renewed NPDES permit. The volume of three, the loggerhead sea turtle has been term.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16135
Summary requirements of 10 CFR part 20, CFR part 50. Therefore, the increased In summary, the proposed EPU would ‘‘STANDARDS FOR PROTECTION impact of the uprate on offsite doses not result in a significant change in non- AGAINST RADIATION,’’ and 10 CFR from gaseous effluents would not be radiological impacts in the areas of land part 50, ‘‘DOMESTIC LICENSING OF significant. PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION use, water use, waste discharges, Liquid Radioactive Waste and Offsite FACILITIES,’’ Appendix I. These cooling tower operation, terrestrial and Dose radioactive waste streams are discussed aquatic biota, transmission facility During normal operation, the liquid operation, or social and economic in the FES. The proposed EPU would not result in changes in the operation or effluent treatment systems process and factors. No other non-radiological control the release of liquid radioactive impacts were identified or would be design of equipment in the gaseous, liquid, or solid waste systems. The effluents to the environs, such that the expected. Table 1 summarizes the non- uprate would not introduce new or doses to individuals offsite are radiological environmental impacts of different radiological release pathways maintained within the limits of 10 CFR the proposed EPU at BSEP. and does not increase the probability of part 20 and the dose design objectives Table 1.—Summary of Non- an operator error or equipment of Appendix I to 10 CFR part 50. The Radiological Environmental Impacts malfunction that would result in an liquid radioactive waste systems are designed to cleanup and recycle as Land Use: No change in land use or uncontrolled release of radioactive much water as practicable; the liquid aesthetics; three small cooling towers on material. The uprate will not affect the environmental monitoring of any of effluents that are released are top of radwaste building. continuously monitored and discharges Cooling Tower: No change in visual or these waste streams or the radiological terminated if effluents exceed preset aesthetic impact; no added impact on monitoring requirements contained in levels of radioactive material. CP&L noise level; no significant impact from licensing basis documents. estimates that the amount of radioactive modular construction of the cooling Gaseous Radioactive Waste and Offsite material released in liquid effluents towers; no significant fogging, icing, or Doses would not increase significantly. CP&L drifting plumes. During normal operation, the gaseous indicated that the amounts of liquid Transmission Facilities: No physical effluent treatment systems process and radioactive material that have been modifications to the transmission lines control the release of gaseous released from BSEP in the last several and facilities; meet shock safety radioactive effluents to the environs, years are well below the estimates requirements; no changes to right-of- including small quantities of noble presented in the FES. CP&L expects ways; small increase in electrical gases, halogens, particulates, and little or no increase in the quantity of current would cause small increase in tritium, such that the doses to radioactive material released in liquid electromagnetic field around the individuals offsite are maintained effluents as a result of the uprate. The transmission lines. within the limits of 10 CFR part 20 and NRC staff has independently reviewed Terrestrial Biota: No additional the dose design objectives of Appendix the information presented by the impact on endangered herbs and birds I to 10 CFR part 50 (10 CFR part 20 licensee and confirmed the licensee’s or other terrestrial biota. includes the requirements of the U.S. conclusions. In addition, the calculated Water Use: No increase in the rate of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) doses to members of the public offsite withdrawal of water from the Cape Fear regulation 40 CFR part 190, associated with these levels of release of River; up to an additional 23.7 liters per ‘‘ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION radioactive liquid are below 1 percent of second (375 gpm) of water from PROTECTION STANDARDS FOR the dose design objectives of Appendix Brunswick County supply system, NUCLEAR POWER OPERATIONS’’). I to 10 CFR part 50. Therefore, the approved by County. The gaseous waste management systems increased impact of the uprate on offsite Discharge: Increase in area of plume include the offgas system and various doses from liquid effluents would not be in Atlantic Ocean with increased water building ventilation systems. CP&L significant. temperature from 400 to 800 ha (from estimates that the resulting increase in Solid Radioactive Wastes 1000 to 2000 acres) [area of 0.8 degrees gaseous radioactive effluents would be C (1.44 degrees F) isotherm in Summer]; bounded in direct proportion to the The solid radioactive waste system up to an additional 8.2 liters per second increase in power—15 percent. CP&L collects, processes, packages, and (130 gpm) of blowdown water indicated that a 15-percent increase in temporarily stores radioactive dry and discharged to storm drain system with the amount of gaseous radioactive wet solid wastes prior to shipment small amount of biocide and dispersant material released annually from BSEP in offsite and permanent disposal. The chemicals; application for revised the last several years would still be well largest volume of solid radioactive NPDES permit under review by State of below the estimates presented in the waste at BSEP is low-level radioactive North Carolina. FES. The NRC staff has independently waste; sources of this low-level waste Aquatic Biota: No expected increased reviewed the information presented by include spent resins, filters, charcoal, impact on endangered sea turtles or the licensee and confirmed the sludges from water processing, oil, and other aquatic biota. licensee’s conclusion. dry active waste, which is essentially Social and Economic: No significant CP&L also calculated the potential contaminated trash. During the last change in size of BSEP workforce. increase in the maximum radiation dose several years, CP&L has implemented Radiological Impacts to a member of the public in the waste handling procedures to reduce the environs offsite at BSEP from the volume of low-level waste generated at Radioactive Waste Stream Impacts proposed EPU. A 15-percent increase in BSEP. The volume of low-level BSEP uses waste treatment systems the quantity of gaseous radioactive radioactive waste generated in 2000 was designed to collect, process, and dispose effluents released to the release data for approximately 389 cubic meters (13,877 of gaseous, liquid, and solid wastes that the worst year in the 5-year timeframe cubic ft). The proposed EPU would might contain radioactive material in a from 1996 to 2000 would still result in increase the volume of spent resins, safe and controlled manner such that doses below 1 percent of the dose filters, and sludges because the uprate discharges are in accordance with the design objectives of Appendix I to 10 would produce more radioactive
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16136 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
material that would have to be removed In-plant Radiation Doses (0.25 mSv) by 40 CFR part 190. by processing systems such as the The proposed EPU would result in the Assuming a 15-percent increase in the demineralizers in the condensate production of more radioactive material doses from skyshine (consistent with a system. The licensee estimates that the and higher radiation dose rates in some 15-percent EPU), the expected annual volume of such wastes could increase areas at BSEP. Potentially, the increase dose would be expected to increase to by as much as 15 percent, consistent could be as much as 15 percent, approximately 8 mrem (0.8 mSv), still with the EPU. Even with such an consistent with the proposed 15-percent well below the annual dose limit of 40 increase, the expected volume of low- increase in reactor power. However, CFR part 190. The licensee will level radioactive waste would be well CP&L expects that the BSEP radiation continue to perform surveys as the below the value in the FES. No protection staff will be able to minimize proposed EPU is implemented to assess the combined impact of hydrogen water significant increase would be expected the resultant increase in radiation doses chemistry with the uprate to ensure in the production of the other types of to the plant staff to a level well below continued compliance with the low-level waste. the 15-percent upper-bound estimate by requirements of 40 CFR part 190. In addition to the low-level wastes, using commonly known methods, such Therefore, the increased impact of the the proposed EPU would result in as installation of additional shielding or uprate on offsite doses from direct replacement of 135 control rod blades at more effective systems to remove more radiation sources would not be each unit. This replacement would radioactive material from process significant. occur in stages during the next several streams such as the condensate system. refueling outages. The removed control BSEP has reduced the amount of Postulated Accident Doses rod blades would be stored in the spent radiation dose received by the plant The NRC staff has reviewed the fuel pool, as is commonly done with workers over the last several years. The licensee’s analyses and performed irradiated reactor components, until collective occupational dose for year confirmatory calculations to verify the they can be prepared for shipping and 2000 at BSEP (including both units) was acceptability of the licensee’s calculated disposal offsite. These control rod approximately 3.22 person-Sieverts (Sv) doses under accident conditions. As a blades would not contribute (322 person-rem); the average dose for a result of implementation of the significantly to the overall volume of boiling-water reactor unit in the U.S. in proposed EPU, there could be an solid radioactive waste handled at year 2000 was 1.74 person-Sv (174 increase in the source term used in the BSEP. person-rem). The FES did not discuss evaluation of some of the postulated The proposed EPU would also result occupational dose; however, other FESs accidents in the FES. The inventory of in a greater percentage of the fuel published shortly after the BSEP FES radionuclides in the reactor core is assemblies being removed from the estimated the environmental impact dependent on power level; therefore, the reactor core and replaced with new fuel from occupational dose to be 500 core inventory of radionuclides could assemblies during each refueling outage. person-rem (Sievert unit did not exist at increase by as much as 15 percent. The Currently, 212 fuel assemblies that time) of collective occupational concentration of radionuclides in the (approximately 39 percent) are replaced dose per year per reactor unit. reactor coolant may also increase by as during each refueling; 256 fuel Therefore, the collective dose at BSEP much as 15 percent; however, this assemblies (approximately 47 percent) would not be expected to increase concentration is limited by the BSEP would be replaced each refueling to significantly as a result of the uprate Technical Specifications and is more support the uprated power level. Since and would be well within the impact dependent on the degree of leakage CP&L limits the amount of spent fuel commonly estimated in FESs in the occurring through the fuel cladding. The stored at BSEP and stores the rest of the 1970s. overall quality of fuel cladding has spent fuel from BSEP in the spent fuel Direct Radiation Doses Offsite improved since the mid-1970s when the storage pools at CP&L’s Shearon Harris FES was published, and BSEP has been Nuclear Power Plant (SHNPP), no Direct radiation from radionuclides experiencing very little fuel cladding increased volume of spent fuel would be (mainly nitrogen-16) in the main steam leakage in recent years. Therefore, the expected to be stored at BSEP as a result system components in the turbine reactor coolant concentration of of the uprate. By letter dated December building is scattered by the air above the radionuclides would not be expected to 21, 2000, the NRC granted CP&L an site and provides another offsite public increase significantly. This coolant amendment to the operating license for dose pathway (skyshine) from an concentration is part of the source term SHNPP to allow storage of spent fuel in operating boiling-water reactor. CP&L considered in some of the postulated all four spent fuel storage pools at has routinely monitored the whole body accident analyses. Finally, as previously SHNPP. CP&L has stated that the pools dose rate offsite using discussed above, some of the radwaste at SHNPP have sufficient storage thermoluminescent dosimeters; the streams and storage systems evaluated capacity to handle the additional spent licensee has also performed surveys for postulated accidents may contain fuel assemblies that would be generated offsite with pressurized ion chambers. slightly higher quantities of as a result of the proposed EPU at BSEP. Data from these monitoring methods radionuclides. For those postulated An Environmental Assessment and indicated that the highest annual offsite accidents where the source term Finding of No Significant Impact was dose from skyshine at the site boundary increased, the calculated potential published in the Federal Register on from 1999 to 2001 was 7 millirem radiation dose to individuals at the site December 21, 1999 (64 FR 71514), to (mrem) (.07 mSv). Nitrogen-16 boundary (the exclusion area) and in the address the environmental impact of production is increased by routine low population zone would be fully utilizing the storage capacity of all hydrogen gas injection into the reactor increased over the values presented in four spent fuel pools at SHNPP. The feedwater (hydrogen water chemistry) in the FES. Any such increase in NRC staff concludes that the 1999 EA an effort to prevent intergranular stress calculated accident doses would not be bounds the impact of storage of the corrosion cracking of reactor internals. expected to be more than 15 percent additional spent fuel assemblies that The annual whole body dose equivalent higher, and the calculated doses would would be generated by the BSEP uprate to a real member of the public (beyond still be below the acceptance criteria of in the SHNPP spent fuel pools. the site boundary) is limited to 25 mrem 10 CFR part 100, ‘‘REACTOR SITE
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16137
CRITERIA,’’ and the Standard Review enrichment for the uprate will not would continue to be well within NRC Plan (NUREG–0800). Also, no exceed 5 weight percent uranium-235 criteria. modifications in the plant design or and the rod average discharge burnup Solid Radioactive Waste: Up to 15- operation would be made that would for the uprate will not exceed 60,000 percent increase in volume of low-level significantly increase the probability of MWd/MTU, the environmental impacts solid radwaste; increases in amount of an accident. Therefore, the NRC staff of the uprate will remain bounded by spent control rod blades and spent fuel concludes that the uprate would not the conclusions in Tables S–3 and S–4 assemblies. significantly increase the probability or and are not significant. Inplant Dose: No significant increase consequences of accidents and would in collective occupational dose not result in a significant increase in the Summary expected. radiological environmental impact of The proposed EPU would not Direct Radiation Dose: Up to 15- BSEP under accident conditions. significantly increase the probability or percent increase in dose rate offsite from After many years of reactor consequences of accidents, would not skyshine; expected annual dose experience and research, the NRC introduce any new radiological release continues to meet NRC/EPA criteria. approved an alternative radiological pathways, would not result in a Postulated Accidents: Up to 15- source term methodology for power significant increase in occupational or percent increase in calculated doses reactors. The alternative source term is public radiation exposure, and would from some postulated accidents; codified in 10 CFR 50.67 and described not result in significant additional fuel calculated doses within NRC criteria. in Regulatory Guide 1.183, ‘‘Alternative cycle environmental impacts. Fuel Cycle & Transportation: Fuel Radiological Source Term for Evaluating Accordingly, the Commission concludes enrichment and burnup would continue Design Basis Accidents at Nuclear that there are no significant radiological to be within bounding assumptions for Power Reactors,’’ which was published environmental impacts associated with Tables S–3 and S–4 in 10 CFR part 51, in July 2000. This methodology also the proposed action. Table 2 ‘‘ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION uses the Total Effective Dose Equivalent summarizes the radiological REGULATIONS FOR DOMESTIC methodology, which is recommended environmental impacts of the proposed LICENSING AND RELATED by the International Commission on EPU at BSEP. REGULATORY FUNCTIONS’’; Radiation Protection and the National conclusions of tables regarding impact Council on Radiation Protection and Alternatives to Proposed Action would remain valid. Measurements. CP&L submitted a As an alternative to the proposed Agencies and Persons Consulted proposal to the NRC to implement the action, the NRC staff considered denial alternative source term for the BSEP of the proposed EPU ( i.e., the ‘‘no-action In accordance with the its stated accident analyses; therefore, the alternative’’). Denial of the application policy, on March 29, 2002, the NRC staff application for the proposed EPU would result in no change in the current consulted with the North Carolina State assessed the postulated accidents environmental impacts; however, other official , Mr. J. James, of the North discussed in the FES using the new fossil-fueled generating facilities would Carolina Department of Environment, methodology. CP&L concluded that the be built in CP&L’s service area in North Commerce and Natural Resources, new calculated doses for the uprate met Carolina and South Carolina in order to Division of Radiation Protection, all the applicable acceptance criteria of maintain sufficient power-generating regarding the environmental impact of 10 CFR 50.67 and Regulatory Guide capacity. Construction and operation of the proposed action. The State official 1.183. The results of the NRC staff’s a fossil-fueled plant would create had no comments. calculations will be presented in the impacts in air quality, land use, and Finding of No Significant Impact safety evaluation to be issued with the waste management. Implementation of license amendments. the proposed EPU would have less On the basis of the EA, the Commission concludes that the Fuel Cycle and Transportation Impacts impact on the environment than the construction and operation of a new proposed action will not have a The environmental impacts of the fuel fossil-fueled generating facility and does significant effect on the quality of the cycle and transportation of fuels and not involve environmental impacts that human environment. Accordingly, the wastes are described in Tables S–3 and are significantly different from those Commission has determined not to S–4 of 10 CFR 51.51 and 10 CFR 51.52, presented in the 1974 FES and the 1996 prepare an environmental impact respectively. An additional NRC generic EA for BSEP. statement for the proposed action. EA (53 FR 30355, dated August 11, For further details with respect to the 1988, as corrected by 53 FR 32322, Alternative Use of Resources proposed action, see the licensee’s dated August 24, 1988) evaluated the This action does not involve the use application dated August 9, 2001, as applicability of Tables S–3 and S–4 to of any resources not previously supplemented October 17, November 1, higher burnup cycle and concluded that considered in the 1974 FES and the 7, 28, and 30, December 4, 10, 17 (2 there is no significant change in 1996 EA for BSEP. letters), and 20, 2001, January 20, environmental impact from the February 1, 4, 13, 14, 21 (2 letters), and parameters evaluated in Tables S–3 and Table 2.—Summary of Radiological 25 (3 letters), and March 4, 5, 7, 14, 20, S–4 for fuel cycles with uranium Environmental Impacts 22, and 25, 2002. Documents may be enrichments up to 5 weight percent Gaseous Effluents & Doses: Up to 15- examined and/or copied for a fee at the uranium-235 and burnups less than percent increase in amount of NRC’s PDR, at One White Flint North, 60,000 megawatt (thermal)-days per radioactive material in gaseous 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), metric ton of uranium-235 (MWd/MTU). effluents; within FES estimate; offsite Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available CP&L has concluded that the fuel doses would continue to be well within records will be accessible electronically enrichment at BSEP will increase to NRC criteria. from the ADAMS Public Library approximately 4.4 percent as a result of Liquid Effluents & Doses: No component on the NRC Web site, http:/ the proposed EPU with burnup significant increase in amount of /www.nrc.gov (the Electronic Reading remaining at approximately 45,000 radioactive material in liquid effluents; Room). If you do not have access to MWd/MTU. Because the fuel within FES estimate; offsite doses ADAMS or if there are problems in
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16138 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
accessing the documents located in comment periods are scheduled for A copy may also be obtained under the ADAMS, contact the NRC PDR Thursday, April 18 and Friday, April Grants Management heading from the Reference staff at (800) 397–4209, or 19. The agenda for the meeting, OMB home page on the Internet which (301) 415–4737, or by e-mail at including specific times for the public is located at www.omb.gov. [email protected]. comment periods, and guidelines for Comments on the 2002 Supplement Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day making public comments will be posted should be mailed to the Office of of March 2002. on the Commission’s Web site at Management and Budget, Office of For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. http://www.oceancommission.gov prior Federal Financial Management, Room to the meeting. John M. Goshen, 6025, New Executive Office Building, Project Manager, Section 2, Project Dated: March 29, 2002. Washington, DC 20503. Where possible, Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project Thomas R. Kitsos, comments should reference the Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Executive Director, Commission on Ocean applicable page numbers. Electronic Regulation. Policy. mail comments may be submitted to [FR Doc. 02–8138 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 02–8125 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] [email protected]. Please include BILLING CODE 7590–01–P BILLING CODE 6820–WM–P the full body of the electronic mail comments in the text of the message and not as an attachment. Please include the COMMISSION ON OCEAN POLICY OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND name, title, organization, postal address, BUDGET telephone number, and e-mail address Public Meeting of the sender in the text of the message. Audits of States, Local Governments, AGENCY: Commission on Ocean Policy. and Non-Profit Organizations; Circular FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ACTION: Notice; change of meeting A–133 Compliance Supplement Recipients should contact their location and time. cognizant or oversight agency for audit, AGENCY: Executive Office of the or Federal awarding agency, as SUMMARY: The U.S. Commission on President, Office of Management and appropriate under the circumstances. Ocean Policy will hold its fourth Budget. Subrecipients should contact their pass- regional meeting, the Commission’s ACTION: Notice of availability of the 2002 through entity. Federal agencies should sixth public meeting, to hear and Circular A–133 Compliance contact Terrill W. Ramsey, Office of discuss coastal and ocean issues of Supplement. concern to the Southwest region of the Management and Budget, Office of United States, covering the coastal area SUMMARY: On April 9, 2001 (66 FR Federal Financial Management, of California. Notice of this meeting was 18517), the Office of Management and telephone (202) 395–3993. originally published on March 25, 2002. Budget (OMB) issued a notice of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office The purpose of this second notice is to availability of the 2001 Circular A–133 of Management and Budget (OMB) provide the new meeting location and Compliance Supplement. The notice received seven comment letters on the time. also offered interested parties an 2001 Supplement. The comment letters opportunity to comment on the 2001 DATES: Public meetings will now be dealt with various technical issues and held Thursday, April 18, 2002 from Circular A–133 Compliance changes were made where appropriate. Supplement. The 2002 Supplement has 10:30 a.m. to 6:15 p.m. and Friday, Mark W. Everson, April 19, 2002 from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. been updated to add 8 additional programs, updated for program changes, Controller. ADDRESSES: The meeting location is now and makes technical corrections. A list [FR Doc. 02–8119 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] the John M. Olguin Auditorium, of changes to the 2002 Supplement can BILLING CODE 3110–01–P Cabrillo Marine Aquarium, 3720 be found at Appendix V of the Stephen White Drive, San Pedro, supplement. Due to its length, the 2002 California. Supplement is not included in this FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Notice. See Addresses for information RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD Terry Schaff, U.S. Commission on about how to obtain a copy. This Notice Ocean Policy, 1120 20th Street, NW., also offers interested parties an Notice of Public Meeting; Sunshine Act Washington, DC 20036, 202–418–3442, opportunity to comment on the 2002 [email protected]. Supplement. The meeting of the Railroad Retirement Board which was to be held SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This DATES: The 2002 Supplement will apply meeting is being held pursuant to to audits of fiscal years beginning after on April 3, 2002, 10 a.m. at the Board’s requirements under the Oceans Act of June 30, 2001 and supersedes the 2001 meeting room on the 8th floor of its 2000 (Pub. L. 106–256, Section Supplement. All comments on the 2002 headquarters building, 844 North Rush 3(e)(1)(E)). The agenda will include Supplement must be in writing and Street, Chicago, Illinois, 60611, has been presentations by invited speakers received by October 31, 2002. Late canceled. representing local and regional comments will be considered to the The person to contact for more government agencies and non- extent practicable. information is Beatrice Ezerski, governmental organizations, comments ADDRESSES: Copies of the 2002 Secretary to the Board, Phone No. 312– from the public and any required Supplement may be purchased at any 751–4920. administrative discussions and Government Printing Office (GPO) Dated: April 1, 2002. executive sessions. Invited speakers and bookstore (stock numbers: 041–001– members of the public are requested to 00580–3 (paper) and 041–001–00581–1 Beatrice Ezerski, submit their statements for the record (CD–ROM)). The main GPO bookstore is Secretary to the Board. electronically by April 10, 2002 to the located at 710 North Capitol Street, NW, [FR Doc. 02–8215 Filed 4–2–02; 10:19 am] meeting Point of Contact. Public Washington, DC 20401, (202) 512–0132. BILLING CODE 7905–01–M
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16139
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE ‘‘MSRB’’) filed with the Securities and transaction may not necessarily provide COMMISSION Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’ a reliable indicator of ‘‘market price’’ or ‘‘SEC’’) a proposed rule change (File and might be misleading to an observer [File No. 500–1] No. SR–MSRB–2002–04) as described in not familiar with the market. At the In the Matter of NetAir.com, Inc.; Order Items I, II, and III below, which Items same time, the Board has made a of Suspension of Trading have been prepared by the MSRB. The commitment to review the use of these Commission is publishing this notice to reports as experience is obtained and April 2, 2002. solicit comments on the proposed rule eventually to move to transparency It appears to the Securities and change from interested persons. reporting on a more contemporaneous Exchange Commission that there is a and comprehensive basis.3 I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s lack of current and accurate information Since 1995, the Board has made Statement of the Terms of Substance of concerning the securities of NetAir.com, ongoing efforts to increase price the Proposed Rule Change Inc. (‘‘NetAir’’), a Nevada corporation transparency in the municipal securities headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah. The MSRB has filed with the market in measured steps, culminating Questions have been raised regarding Commission a proposed rule change in comprehensive, real-time price the accuracy of assertions by NetAir, with regard to Rule G–14, on reports of transparency. The first price and by others, in its annual report filed sales or purchases, to increase transparency report, begun in 1995, was on Form 10–KSB for the period ended transparency in the municipal securities a T+1 report that summarized inter- December 31, 2001, and in press market. The proposed rule change dealer trades in frequently traded releases concerning, among other things: would not change the wording of Rule municipal securities. In 1998, the Board (1) Netair’s ability to commence G–14. added customer trades to the T+1 business operations; (2) the summary reports, and in January 2000 II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s began publishing individual transaction qualifications of NetAir’s secretary, Statement of the Purpose of and Robert Waddell, to perform aircraft data on frequently traded securities in Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule addition to summarizing their high, low appraisals, Netair’s purported core Change business; and (3) the identity of the and average prices. The Board has also persons in control of the operations and In its filing with the Commission, the introduced ‘‘comprehensive’’ management of the company. Board included statements concerning transaction reports for this market, The Commission is of the opinion that the purpose of and basis for the which list all municipal securities the public interest and the protection of proposed rule change and discussed any transactions (regardless of frequency of investors require a suspension of trading comments it received on the proposed trading), but which are available no less 4 in the securities of the above listed rule change. The texts of these than two weeks after trade date. At this time, the Board believes that company. statements may be examined at the the next appropriate step in this process Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to places specified in Item IV below. The is to change the threshold for Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Board has prepared summaries, set forth determining that a municipal security is Act of 1934, that trading in the above in Sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of ‘‘frequently traded’’ for purposes of the listed company is suspended for the the most significant aspects of such T+1 transparency report. The proposed period from 9:30 a.m. EST on April 2, statements. rule change would lower the threshold 2002, through 11:59 p.m. EST on April A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s from four to three trades per day. 15, 2002. Statement of the Purpose of, and By the Commission. Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Impact of Proposed Report on Transparency Jill M. Peterson, Change The proposed threshold change Assistant Secretary. 1. Purpose [FR Doc. 02–8242 Filed 4–2–02; 2:02 pm] would increase substantially the The Board has a long-standing policy proportion of municipal securities BILLING CODE 8010–01–P to increase price transparency in the market activity that is reported on the municipal securities market, with the day after trading. The present report, SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE ultimate goal of disseminating with a threshold of four or more trades COMMISSION comprehensive and contemporaneous per day, includes an average of 11,600 pricing data. One product of the Board’s trades in 1,100 different issues, with a [Release No. 34–45674; File No. SR–MSRB– Transaction Reporting Program is its total par value of about 3.9 billion 2002–04] Daily Transaction Report (the ‘‘Report’’), 3 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice which has been provided to subscribers See, e.g., ‘‘Board to Proceed with Pilot Program each day since January 2000. The report to Disseminate Inter-Dealer Transaction of Filing of Proposed Rule Change by Information,’’ MSRB Reports, Vol. 14, No. 1 the Municipal Securities Rulemaking is made available each morning by 7 am (January 1994). In its approval order for the Inter- Board Relating to Rule G–14, on and includes details of transactions in Dealer Daily Report, the Commission noted that the Board, in proceeding to subsequent levels of Reports of Sales or Purchases municipal securities which were ‘‘frequently traded’’ the previous transparency, ‘‘should continue to work toward publicly disseminating the maximum level of useful March 29, 2002. business day. Since the beginning of the information to the public while ensuring that the Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Transaction Reporting Program in 1995, information and manner in which it is presented is Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ‘‘frequently traded’’ securities have been not misleading.’’ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34955 (November 9, 1994), 59 FR 59810 1 2 (‘‘Act’’) and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, defined as those that were traded four (November 18, 1994). notice is hereby given that on March 27, or more times on a given business day. 4 The first comprehensive report was introduced 2002 the Municipal Securities In designing the transparency reports in October 2000 and listed all trades after a one- Rulemaking Board (‘‘Board’’ or that appear on the day after trade date month delay. The latest comprehensive report (T+1), the Board has adopted the began operation in November 2001 and has a two- week delay. See Securities Exchange Act Release 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). threshold of four trades a day because No. 44894 (October 2, 2001), 66 FR 51485 (October 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. of the concern that an isolated 9, 2001).
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16140 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
dollars. Under the proposed threshold, 90 days of such date if it finds such (‘‘NASD’’ or ‘‘Association’’), through its the report is expected to include an longer period to be appropriate and wholly owned subsidiary, NASD average of 14,400 trades in 2,600 issues, publishes its reasons for so finding, or Regulation, Inc. (‘‘NASDR’’), and on with a total par value of about 5.2 (ii) as to which the self-regulatory February 27, 2002, the New York Stock billion dollars. This represents a 24 organization consents, the Commission Exchange, Inc. (‘‘NYSE’’ or percent increase in the number of trades will: ‘‘Exchange’’), filed with the Securities reported, a more-than-twofold increase (a) By order approve such proposed and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’ or in the number of issues reported, and a rule change, or ‘‘Commission’’) proposed rule changes, 33 percent increase in par value (b) Institute proceedings to determine pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the reported.5 whether the proposed rule change Securities Exchange Act of 1934 should be disapproved 1 2 Description of Service (‘‘Act’’) and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, IV. Solicitation of Comments relating to research analyst conflicts of The enhanced Daily Transaction interest. A complete description of the Report with the three-trade threshold Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and proposed rule changes is found in the will replace the current report and will notice of filing, which was published in be available each day to subscribers via arguments concerning the foregoing. Including whether the proposed rule the Federal Register on March 14, the Internet. Subscribers to the current 3 change is consistent with the Act. 2002. The comment period expires on Service receive the report free of charge, April 4, 2002. The Commission has and their subscriptions will continue Persons making written submissions should file six copies thereof with the decided to extend the comment period should the proposed Service be pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act.4 implemented. New subscriptions will be Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Accordingly, the comment period shall available free to parties who sign a be extended until April 18, 2002. subscription agreement. In addition, Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of recent reports will continue to be the submissions, all subsequent Interested persons are invited to available for examination, also free of amendments, all written statements submit written data, views, and charge, at the Board’s Public Access with respect to the proposed rule arguments concerning the foregoing, Facility in Alexandria, VA. change that are filed with the including whether the proposed rule Commission, and all written changes are consistent with the Act. Implementation Schedule communications relating to the Persons making written submissions The enhanced report will be available proposed rule change between the should file six copies thereof with the to subscribers as soon as practical after Commission and any person, other than Secretary, Securities and Exchange SEC approval of the proposed rule those that may be withheld from the Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, change. It is estimated that the period public in accordance with the Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of between approval and implementation provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be the submission, all subsequent will not exceed two weeks. available for inspection and copying in amendments, all written statements the Commission’s Public Reference 2. Basis with respect to the proposed rule Room. Copies of the filing will also be changes that are filed with the The MSRB has adopted the proposed available for inspection and copying at Commission, and all written rule change pursuant to Section the MSRB’s principal offices. All communications relating to the 15B(b)(2)(I) of the Act, which authorizes submissions should refer to File No. proposed rule changes between the the MSRB to adopt rules that provide for SR–MSRB–2002–04 and should be Commission and any person, other than the operation and administration of the submitted by April 25, 2002. those that may be withheld from the Board. For the Commission, by the Division of public in accordance with the Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 6 Statement on Burden on Competition authority. available for inspection and copying in Margaret H. McFarland, the Commission’s Public Reference The MSRB does not believe that the Deputy Secretary. Room. Copies of such filing will also be proposed rule change will impose any [FR Doc. 02–8137 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] available for inspection and copying at burden on competition in that it applies BILLING CODE 8010–01–P the principal offices of the Self- equally to all dealers in municipal Regulatory Organizations. All securities. submissions should refer to File Nos. C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE SR–NASD–2002–21 and SR–NYSE– Statement on Comments on the COMMISSION 2002–09 and should be submitted by Proposed Rule Change Received from [Release No. 34–45679; File Nos. SR– April 18, 2002. Members, Participants, or Others NASD–2002–21; SR–NYSE–2002–09] For the Commission, by the Division of Written comments on the proposed rule Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated Self-Regulatory Organizations: Notice change were neither solicited nor authority.5 received. of Extension of the Comment Period for the Proposed Rule Changes by the Margaret H. McFarland, III. Date of Effectiveness of the National Association of Securities Deputy Secretary. Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Dealers, Inc. and the New York Stock [FR Doc. 02–8302 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Commission Action Exchange, Inc. Relating to Research BILLING CODE 8010–01–P Within 35 days of the date of Analyst Conflicts of Interest publication of this notice in the Federal 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). April 2, 2002. Register or within such longer period (i) 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. as the Commission may designate up to On February 13, 2002, the National 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 45526 Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (March 8, 2002), 67 FR 11526. 5 These data are based upon market activity from 4 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). April 1, 2001 through July 31, 2001. 6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 5 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16141
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION procedures may consist of the adoption in Exhibits A and A–2, attached to its of a show-cause order, a tentative order, initial application and first supplement. Office of the Secretary; Notice of or in appropriate cases a final order Dorothy Y. Beard, Applications for Certificates of Public without further proceedings. Convenience and Necessity and Docket Number: OST–1999–6246. Federal Register Liaison. Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Date Filed: November 1, 2000. [FR Doc. 02–7720 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Subpart B (formerly Subpart Q) during Due Date for Answers, Conforming BILLING CODE 4910–62–P the Week Ending May 19, 2000 Applications, or Motion to Modify Scope: November 22, 2000. The following Applications for Description: Motion of Delta Air DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Certificates of Public Convenience and Lines, Inc. for leave to file and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Supplement #4, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Office of the Secretary; Availability of Permits were filed under Subpart B 41102 and 41108 and Subpart B, the Federal Radionavigation Plan (formerly Subpart Q) of the Department supplementing its September 21, 1999, AGENCY: Office of the Assistant of Transportation’s Procedural certificate application by adding the Secretary for Transportation Policy, Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et following points: Comoros, Cyprus, DOT. seq.). The due date for Answers, Dominica, French Guiana, French Conforming Applications, or Motions to Polynesia, Lesotho, Macau, Maldives, ACTION: Availability of the Federal Modify Scope are set forth below for Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Federated Radionavigation Plan. each application. Following the Answer States of Mongolia, Palau, Qatar, St. period DOT may process the application Kitts & Nevis, St. Vincent & Grenadines, SUMMARY: The 2001 edition of the by expedited procedures. Such Samoa and Swaziland to the list of Federal Radionavigation Plan (FRP) has procedures may consist of the adoption countries included in Exhibit A (Second been published and is available for of a show-cause order, a tentative order, Revised), attached to Supplement #3 to comment. The policies in the 2001 FRP or in appropriate cases a final order Delta’s application, filed May 18, 2000. focus on transition to GPS based without further proceedings. services as a primary means of Docket Number: OST–1999–6246. Dorothy Y. Beard, navigation, recognizing the need to Date Filed: May 18, 2000. Federal Register Liaison. maintain backup navigation aids and Due Date for Answers, Conforming [FR Doc. 02–7719 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] provide redundant radionavigation Applications, or Motion to Modify BILLING CODE 4910–62–P service where required. The 2001 FRP Scope: June 8, 2000. projects an initial operating capability Description: Motion of Delta Air for the FAA Wide Area Augmentation Lines, Inc. for leave to file and DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION System in 2003. The FAA’s Local Area Supplement #3, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Augmentation System is planned to Office of the Secretary; Notice of 41102 and 41108 and Subpart B, begin public service in 2006. The 2001 Applications for Certificates of Public supplementing its September 21, 1999, FRP also includes a revised schedule for Convenience and Necessity and certificate application by adding Turks phasing down land-based navigation Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under and Caicos to the list of countries aids. The phase down of most land- Subpart B (Formerly Subpart Q) During included in Exhibit A (Revised), based navigation aids operated by the the Week Ending December 31, 1999 attached to Supplement #2 to Delta’s FAA will begin in 2010. The FAA does application, filed December 29, 1999. The following Applications for not plan phasing out any Instrument Dorothy Y. Beard, Certificates of Public Convenience and Landing Systems (ILSs) for Category II Federal Register Liaison. Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier and III approaches. The U.S. will continue operating Loran-C in the short [FR Doc. 02–7718 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Permits were filed under Subpart B (formerly Subpart Q) of the Department term while the Administration BILLING CODE 4910–62–P of Transportation’s Procedural continues to evaluate the long-term Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et. need for the system. Maritime DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION seq.). The due date for Answers, radiobeacons not used for differential Conforming Applications, or Motions to GPS have been phased out. Stand-alone Office of the Secretary; Notice of Modify Scope are set forth below for aeronautical nondirectional beacons Applications for Certificates of Public each application. Following the Answer (NDBs) will be phased out starting in Convenience and Necessity and period DOT may process the application 2010. NDBs used as compass locators Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under by expedited procedures. Such for ILSs will be phased out when the Subpart B (Formerly Subpart Q) During procedures may consist of the adoption underlying ILSs are withdrawn. All the Week Ending November 3, 2000 of a show-cause order, a tentative order, comments, concerns, and suggestions or in appropriate cases a final order regarding the current policies and plans The following Applications for without further proceedings. in the 2001 FRP will be considered in Certificates of Public Convenience and Docket Number: OST–1999–6246. formulation of the 2003 FRP. Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Date Filed: December 29, 1999. DATES: Permits were filed under Subpart B Due Date for Answers, Conforming Comments must be received by (formerly Subpart Q) of the Department Applications, or Motion to Modify December 31, 2002 for consideration in of Transportation’s Procedural Scope: January 26, 2000. development of the 2003 FRP. Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et. Description: Motion of Delta Air ADDRESSES: Comments should be seq.). The due date for Answers, Lines, Inc., for leave to file and forwarded to the Chairman, DOT POS/ Conforming Applications, or Motions to Supplement #2, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. NAV Working Group, U.S. Department Modify Scope are set forth below for 41102 and 41108 and Subpart Q, of Transportation (P–7), Room 10315, each application. Following the Answer supplementing its September 21, 1999, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, period DOT may process the application certificate application by adding DC 20590. E-mail: by expedited procedures. Such Portugal to the list of countries included [email protected].
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16142 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of the Aviation Safety and Capacity Michael Shaw, Department of Vanessa Wilkins, Office of Rulemaking Expansion Act of 1990 (Title IX of the Transportation (P–7), 400 7th Street, (ARM–1), Federal Aviation Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of SW, Washington, DC, 20590, (202) 366– Administration, 800 Independence 1990) (Pub. L. 101–508) and Part 158 of 0353. Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Beginning Tel. (202) 267–8029. CFR Part 158). This notice is published with this edition of the FRP, Federal This notice is published pursuant to pursuant to paragraph d of § 158.29. radionavigation information previously 14 CFR 11.85 and 11.91. PFC Applications Approved contained in a single document will be Issued in Washington, DC, on March 29, published in two separate documents, 2002. Public Agency: Sarasota Manatee the Federal Radionavigation Plan and a Donald P. Byrne, Airport Authority, Sarasota, Florida. Application Number: 00–04–C–00– companion document entitled Federal Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations. Radionavigation Systems (FRS). The SRQ. FRP includes the introduction, policies, Dispositions of Petitions Application Type: Impose and use a PFC. operating plans, system selection Docket No.: FAA–2002–11487. considerations, and R&D sections and PFC Level: $3.00. Petitioner: Bombardier Aerospace, Total PFC Revenue Approved in this will allow more efficient and responsive Learjet, Inc. Decision: $36,126,915. updates of policy and planning Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR Earliest Charge Effective Date: April 1, information. Sections relating to 145.45(f). 2002. government roles and responsibilities, Description of Relief Sought/ Estimated Charge Expiration Date: user requirements, and systems Disposition: To permit Learjet to assign October 1, 2015. descriptions have been moved to the a copy of its repair station inspection Class of Air Carriers Not Required to companion FRS and will be updated as procedures manual (IPM) to key Collect PFC’s: Air taxi/commercial necessary. individuals within departments and operators filing FAA Form 1800–31. Free copies of the 2001 FRP are make the IPM available to all other Determination: Approved. Based on available on CD ROM from the Volpe repair station personnel rather then give information contained in the public National Transportation System Center, a copy of the manual to each of its agency’s application, the FAA has Kendall Square, Cambridge, Mass. supervisory and inspection personnel. determined that the approved class 02142. The telephone number there is Grant, 03/26/2002, Exemption No. accounts for less than 1 percent of the (617) 494–2908. The 1999 FRP is also on 7240A. total annual enplanements at Sarasota the Internet World Wide Web at http:/ Docket No.: FAA–2002–11562 Bradenton International Airport. /www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/frp2001. Petitioner: United Airlines, Inc. Brief Description of Project Approved Issued in Washington, DC, on March 28, Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR for Collection and Use: Airport terminal 2002. 121.697(a)(3), (b), (c), and (d) and development. Linda L. Lawson, 121.709(b)(3). Decision Date: October 3, 2000. Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Description of Relief Sought/ For Further Information Contact: Transportation Policy. Disposition: To permit Untied Airlines Vernon P. Rupinta, Orlando Airports [FR Doc. 02–8185 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] to use computerized signatures to satisfy District Office, (407) 812–6331, ext. 24. the airworthiness release signature BILLING CODE 4910–62–P Public Agency: Palm Beach County requirements of part 121 in lieu of Department of Airports, West Palm physical signatures. Beach, Florida. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Grant, 03/26/2002, Exemption No. Application Number: 02–06–U–00– 5151G. PBI. Federal Aviation Administration Application Type: Use PFC revenue. [FR Doc. 02–8150 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] PFC Level: $3.00. [Summary Notice No. PE–2002–27] BILLING CODE 4910–13–M Total PFC Revenue to Be Used in this Petition for Exemption; Dispositions of Decision: $64,684,000. Charge Effective Date: December 1, Petitions Issued DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 2000. AGENCY: Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Federal Aviation Federal Aviation Administration Administration (FAA), DOT. December 1, 2005. ACTION: Notice of dispositions of prior Notice of Passenger Facility Charge Class of Air Carriers Not Required to petitions. (PFC) Approvals and Disapprovals Collect PFC’s: No change from previous approval. SUMMARY: Pursuant to FAA’s rulemaking AGENCY: Federal Aviation Brief Description of Projects Approved provisions governing the application, Administration (FAA), DOT. for Use: processing, and dispositions for ACTION: Monthly Notice of PFC Construct taxiway A extension and exemption part 11 of Title 14, Code of Approvals and Disapprovals. In canal relocation. Federal Regulations (14 CFR), this February 2002, there were five Construct perimeter road. notice contains the dispositions of applications approved. This notice also Decision Date: February 12, 2002. certain petitions previously received. includes information on one For Further Information Contact: The purpose of this notice is to improve application, approved in October, 2000, Vernon P. Rupinta, Orlando Airports the public’s awareness of, and inadvertently left off the October 2000 District Office, (407) 812–6331, ext. 24. participation in, this aspect of FAA’s notice. Additionally, 19 approved Public Agency: City of Lynchburg, regulatory activities. Neither publication amendments to previously approved Virginia. of this notice nor the inclusion or applications are listed. Application Number: 01–03–C–00– ommission of information in the LYH. summary is intended to affect the legal SUMMARY: The FAA publishes a monthly Application Type: Impose and use a status of any petition or its final notice, as appropriate, of PFC approvals PFC. disposition. and disapprovals under the provisions PFC Level: $4.50.
VerDate 11
Total PFC Revenue Approved in this Application Number: 02–02–U–00– Application Number: 01–04–C–00– Decision: $844,951. HGR. SLC. Earliest Charge Effective Date: June 1, Application Type: Use PFC revenue. Application Type: Impose and use a 2002. PFC Level: $4.50. PFC. Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Total PFC Revenue To Be Used in PFC Level: $4.50. January 1, 2005. This Decision: $206,000. Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Charge Effective Date: August 1, 1999. Total PFC Revenue Approved in this Collect PFC’s: Nonscheduled/on- Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Decision: $28,887,570. demand air taxi/commercial operators May 1, 2005. Earliest Charge Effective Date: May 1, filing FAA Form 1800–31. Class of Air Carriers Not Required to 2002. Determination: Approved. Based on Collect PFC’s: No change from previous Estimated Charge Expiration Date: information contained in the public approval. February 1, 2003. agency’s application, the FAA has Brief Description of Project Approved Class of Air Carriers Not Required to determined that the approved class for Use: Collect PFC’s: All air taxi/commercial accounts for less than 1 percent of the Construct snow equipment and operators filing or required to file FAA total annual enplanements at Lynchburg maintenance building. Form 1800–31. Regional Airport. Decision Date: February 21, 2002. Determination: Approved. Based on Brief Description of Projects Approved For Further Information Contact: information contained in the public for Collection and Use: Arthur Winder, Washington Airports agency’s application, the FAA has Acquire snow removal equipment. District Office, (703) 661–1363. determined that the approved class PFC development and administration Public Agency: City of Albuquerque, accounts for less than 1 percent of the costs. New Mexico. total annual enplanements at Salt Lake Acquire aircraft rescue and firefighting Application Number: 02–02–C–00– City International Airport (SLC). vehicle. ABQ. Brief Description of Projects Approved Design and install airfield guidance Application Type: Impose and use a for Collection and Use at SLC at a $4.50 signs. PFC. Design and install precision approach PFC Level: $3.00. PFC Level: path indicator for runway 3. Total PFC Revenue Approved in this Computerized access security system Design and install security access Decision: $44,483,079. (CASS) upgrade, phase, I. control system. Earliest Charge Effective Date: May 1, CASS upgrade, phase II. Rehabilitate general aviation apron. 2002. Security enhancements. Expand general aviation apron. Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Security fence upgrade, phase III. Rehabilitate and light access road. Acquire land for development. December 1, 2007. Airfield replacement equipment. Rehabilitate high intensity runway Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Runway 16L/34R storm drainage lights for runway 3/21. Collect PFC’s: Air taxi/commercial improvements. Rehabilitate medium intensity taxiway operators operating under Part 135 and Concourse A passenger boarding bridge lights for taxiway B. filing FAA Form 1800–31. modifications. Acquire land for runway 21 runway Determination: Approved. Based on Category III and approach lighting protection zone. information contained on the public system will sequence flashers—II, Obstruction removal. agency’s application, the FAA has runway 16R (now runway 16L). Rehabilitate runway 17/35 (design). determined that the approved class North cargo apron expansion, phase II. Rehabilitate runway 3/21 (design). accounts for less than 1 percent of the Taxiway H reconstruction—phase III. Construct snow equipment/maintenance total annual enplanements at Land acquisition. building. Albuquerque International Support Acquire passenger lift design. (ABQ). Schematic design study. Brief Description of Disapproved Brief Description of Project Approved Terminal 1 south expansion. Projects: for Collection at ABQ and Use at ABQ: Brief Description of Projects Approved Acquire friction measuring equipment. 1993 master plan update. for Collection and Use at SLC at a $3.00 Acquire security equipment. PFC Level: Update airport layout plan. Taxiway E reconstruction. Determination: Disapproved. The Taxiways A and B improvements. Continuous pavement friction test Terminal appron expansion. vehicle. FAA has determined that the addition of Runway 3/21 extension and upgrade. these projects by letter dated September Snow and ice control chemical storage Runway 12/30 extension and facility. 4, 2001, after the airline consultation reconstruction. meeting on May 8, 2001, is in violation Construct access road. Owner controlled insurance program of § 158.23. Construct Support Boulevard. professional liability coverage. Brief Description of Withdrawn Expand air cargo apron. Bus access plaza south of TU–1. Project: Rehabilitate runways 3/21 and PFC application administration costs. Terminal roadway capacity 17/35. Brief Description of Project Approved improvements. Determination: This project was for Collection at ABQ and Use at Double Brief Description of Project Approved withdrawn by the public agency by Eagle II Airport: for Collection at SLC and Use at Airport letter dated September 24, 2001. Apron expansion. II at a $3.00 PFC Level: Security fence. Taxiway improvements. Therefore, the FAA did not rule on this Brief Description of Projects Approved project in this decision. Runway improvements. Decision Date: February 12, 2002. Decision Date: February 27, 2002. for Collection at SLC and Use at Tooele For Further Information Contact: For Further Information Contact: G. Valley Airport (TVY) At at $3.00 PFC Arthur Winder, Washington Airports Thomas Wade, Southwest Region Level: District Office, (703) 661–1363. Airports Division, ((817) 222–5613. Navigational upgrades. Public Agency: County Public Agency: Salt Lake City Land acquisition. Commissioners of Washington County, Corporation, Department of Airports, Brief Description of Project Partially Hagerstown, Maryland. Salt Lake City, Utah. Approved for Collection and Use at SLC
VerDate 11
at a $3.00 PFC Level: Deicing and anti- carriers at the airline consultation Incinerator replacement. icing chemical storage facility. meeting, a portion of this project will Determination: Disapproved. The Determination: Partially approved. supply potable water to private airport FAA has determined that this project is The storage tank for the deicing fluids buildings, which is ineligible under not AIP or PFC eligible and does not is not Airport Improvement Program both the PFC and AIP programs. meet the requirement of § 158.15(b). In (AIP) and PFC eligible in accordance Therefore, the approval was limited to addition, the project does not meet any with Program Guidance Letter 93–1. 4. the portion of the system needed for fire Therefore, the approval is limited to the suppression. PFC objective and, this, does not meet costs associated with the storage Brief Description of Disapproved the requirements of § 158.15(a). building. Projects: Emergency power to jetways. Decision Date: February 28, 2002. Brief Description of Project Partially Determination: Disapproved. The For Further Information Contact: FAA has determined that this project Approved for Collection at SLC and Use Christopher J. Schaffer, Denver Airports at TVY at a $3.00 PFC Level: Water does not meet the requirements for District Office, (303) 342–1258. system. emergency power in accordance with Determination: Partially approved. paragraph 530a of FAA Order 5100.38A, Amendments to PFC Approvals Based on information presented to the AIP Handbook (October 24, 2989).
Amended es- Amendment Original ap- Amended ap- Original esti- timated Amendment No.; City, State approved proved net proved net mated charge charge exp. date PFC revenue PFC revenue exp. date date
93–01–C–03–SJT, San Angelo, TX ...... 11/07/01 $766,009 $655,769 05/01/06 12/01/05 96–02–U–01–SJT, San Angelo, TX ...... 11/07/01 NA NA 05/01/06 12/01/05 96–02–C–01–CAK, Akron, OH ...... 12/20/01 1,764,490 1,681,810 10/01/99 03/01/98 98–03–C–01–CAK, Akron, OH ...... 12/21/01 2,481,900 1,748,860 02/01/03 09/01/99 93–01–C–06–MDW, Chicago, IL ...... 01/10/02 131,084,161 118,930,037 11/01/44 10/01/45 96–05–C–02–MDW, Chicago, IL ...... 01/10/02 156,538,543 178,087,493 11/01/44 10/01/45 00–07–C–01–MDW, Chicago, IL ...... 01/10/02 592,053,661 611,521,327 11/01/44 10/01/45 99–04–C–03–BGM, Binghamton, NY ...... 01/29/02 1,567,748 1,572,978 04/01/06 04/01/02 *01–03–C–01–LFT, Lafayette, LA ...... 02/14/02 2,323,000 2,323,000 04/01/04 10/01/03 *00–04–C–01–SRQ, Sarasota, FL ...... 02/22/02 36,126,915 38,495,063 10/01/15 02/01/14 92–01–I–03–SPI, Springfield, IL ...... 02/27/02 576,026 639,231 02/01/94 02/01/94 93–02–U–01–SPI, Springfield, IL ...... 02/27/02 NA NA 02/01/94 02/01/94 95–05–U–01–SPI, Springfield, IL ...... 02/27/02 NA NA 02/01/94 02/01/94 *93–03–I–05–SPI, Springfield, IL ...... 02/27/02 3,941,493 3,971,208 02/01/06 10/01/07 *97–08–C–02–SPI, Springfield, IL ...... 02/27/02 212,000 375,000 05/01/07 08/01/08 00–05–C–02–MSP, Minneapolis, MN ...... 02/27/02 106,873,838 122,873,838 12/01/02 07/01/03 94–02–C–02–JAC, Jackson, WY ...... 02/27/02 1,145,500 1,146,830 10/01/97 10/01/97 97–03–C–02–02–JAC, Jackson, WY ...... 02/27/02 304,000 304,000 08/01/98 08/01/98 99–03–C–01–DRO, Durango, CO ...... 02/28/02 699,627 730,634 06/01/03 09/01/02
Note: The amendments denoted by an SUMMARY: This notice announces the 800 Independence Avenue, SW., asterisk (*) include a change to the PFC level availability of and request comments on Washington, DC 20591. charged from $3.00 per enplaned passenger a revised draft Technical Standard FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. to $4.50 per enplaned passenger. For Lafayette, LA, this change is effective on Order (TSO) C–151b, Terrain Awareness Bobbie J. Smith, Technical Programs April 1, 2002. For Sarasota, FL and and Warning System. The draft TSO and Continued Airworthiness Branch, Springfield, IL, this change is effective on tells persons seeking a TSO AIR–120, Aircraft Engineering Division, May 1, 2002. authorization or letter of design Aircraft Certification Service, Federal approval what minimum performance Aviation Administration, 800 Issued in Washington, DC, on March 27, standards (MPS) their terrain awareness Independence Avenue, SW., 2002. and warning systems must meet to be Washington, DC 20591, Telephone (202) Barry Molar, identified with the applicable TSO 267–9546. Manager, Airports Financial Assistance marking. Division. Comments Invited [FR Doc. 02–8149 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] DATES: Comments must identify the Interested persons are invited to BILLING CODE 4910–13–M TSO file number and be received on or comment on the proposed TSO listed in before June 29, 2002. this notice by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they desire DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ADDRESSES: Send all comments on the to the above specified address. proposed technical standard order to: Comments received or the proposed Federal Aviation Administration Technical Programs and Continued technical standards order may be Airworthiness Branch, AIR–120, examined, before and after the Terrain Awareness and Warning Aircraft Engineering Division, Aircraft comments closing date, in Room 815, System Certification Service—File No. TSO– FAA Headquarters Building (FOB–10A), AGENCY: Federal Aviation C151b, Federal Aviation 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Administration, (DOT). Administration, 800 Independence Washington, DC 20591, weekdays Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. except Federal holidays, between 8:30 ACTION: Notice of availability and Or deliver comments to: Federal a.m. and 4:40 p.m. All communications requests for public comment. Aviation Administration, Room 815, received on or before the closing date
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16145
for comments special above will be 1320.5(b), this notice announces that The expiration date for this information considered by the Director of the new information collections collection is January 31, 2005. (7) OMB Aircraft Certification Service before requirements (ICRs) listed below have No. 2130–0557, Safety Integration Plans issuing the final TSO. been approved by the Office of (49 CFR part 244). The expiration date Management and Budget (OMB). These Background for this information collection is March ICRs pertain to 49 CFR Parts 219, 229, 31, 2005. This is revised TSO that sets forth 236, 241, and 244. Additionally, FRA minimum operational performance hereby announces that other ICRs listed Additionally, the following standards that a Terrain Awareness and below have been re-approved by the information collections have been re- Warning System (TAWS) equipment Office of Management and Budget approved: (8) OMB No. 2130–0010, must meet to be identified with the (OMB). These ICRs pertain to Parts 213, Track Safety Standards: Gage Restraint TSO–C151b Class A, B, or C marking. 214, 215, 216, 220, 223, and 239. The Measurement Systems (49 CFR part This revision adds the requirements for OMB approval numbers, titles, and 213). The new expiration date for this a Class C designation. expiration dates are included herein information collection is March 31, The standards of this TSO apply to under supplementary information. 2004. (9) OMB No. 2130–0504, Special equipment intended to provide pilots FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Notice For Repairs (49 CFR part 216). and flight crews with both aural and Robert Brogan, Office of Planning and The new expiration date for this visual alters to aid in preventing an Evaluation Division, RRS–21, Federal information collection is March 31, inadvertent controlled flight into terrain Railroad Administration, 1120 Vermont 2004. (10) OMB No. 2130–0511, (CFIT) accident. Class A and B TAWS Ave., NW., Mail Stop 17, Washington, Designation of Qualified Persons (49 equipment are required by 14 CFR Parts DC 20590 (telephone: (202) 493–6292), CFR part 215). The new expiration date 91, 135, and 121. Class C equipment is or Debra Steward, Office of Information for this information collection is March intended for voluntary installations on Technology and Productivity 31, 2004. (11) OMB No. 2130–0524, aircraft not covered by the TAWS Improvement, RAD–20, Federal Railroad Communications (Formerly requirements in 14 CFR Parts 91, 135, Railroad Administration, 1120 Vermont Radio Standards and Procedures) (49 and 121. Ave., NW., Mail Stop 35, Washington, CFR part 220). The new expiration date How To Obtain Copies DC 20590 (telephone: (202) 493–6139). for this information collection is (These telephone numbers are not toll- November 30, 2004. (12) OMB No. A copy of the proposed TSO––C151 free.) may be obtained via the information 2130–0539, Railroad Worker Protection: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The contained in section title FOR FURTHER Roadway Maintenance Machines (49 Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 INFORMATION CONTACT. Copies of RTCA CFR part 214). The new expiration date (PRA), Public Law No. 104–13, section Document No. RTCA/DO–160D, for this information collection is March 2, 109 Stat. 163 (1995) (codified as ‘‘Environmental Conditions and Test 31, 2004. (13) OMB No. 2130–0545, revised at 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), and its Procedures for Airborne Equipment,’’ Passenger Train Emergency implementing regulations, 5 CFR part dated July 29, 1997, RTCA/DO–161A, Preparedness (49 CFR parts 223 and 1320, require Federal agencies to Minimum Performance Standards— 239). The new expiration date for this display OMB control numbers and Airborne Ground Proximity Warning information collection is May 31, 2004. inform respondents of their legal Equipment,’’ dated May 27, 1976, significance once OMB approval is Persons affected by the above RTCA/DO–200A/EURCAE ED–76, obtained. The following new FRA referenced information collections are ‘‘Standards for Processing Aeronautical information collections were approved: not required to respond to any Data,’’ dated September 18, 1998, and (1) OMB No. 2130–0550, Rail- collection of information unless it RTCA/DO–178B, ‘‘Software Equipment Accident/Incident Cost displays a currently valid OMB control Considerations in Airborne Systems and Study (Form FRA F 6180.105). The number. These approvals by the Office Equipment Certification,’’ dated expiration date for this information December 1, 1992, may be purchased of Management and Budget (OMB) collection is September 30, 2003. (2) from RTCA, Inc. 1828 L Street, NW., certify that FRA has complied with the OMB No. 2130–0551, Regional Suite 815, Washington, DC 20036. provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Inspection Point Listing Forms (Forms Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13) and with Nancy Lane, FRA F 6180.106(A)–(E)). The expiration 5 CFR 1320.5(b) by informing the public Acting Manager, Aircraft Engineering date for this information collection is about OMB’s approval of the Division, Aircraft Certification Service. December 31, 2003. (3) OMB No. 2130– information collection requirements of [FR Doc. 02–8151 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] 0552, Locomotive Cab Sanitation the above cited forms and regulations. BILLING CODE 4910–13–M Standards (NPRM) (49 CFR part 229). The expiration date for this information Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520. collection is March 31, 2004. (4) OMB Issued in Washington, DC, on April 1, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION No. 2130–0553, Positive Train Control 2002. (NPRM) (49 CFR part 236). The Kathy A. Weiner, Federal Railroad Administration expiration date for this information Director, Office of Information Technology collection is September 30, 2004. (5) Agency Information Collection and Support Systems, Federal Railroad OMB No. 2130–0555, Foreign Railroads’ Activities Administration. Foreign-Based (FRFB) Employees Who [FR Doc. 02–8184 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] AGENCY: Federal Railroad Perform Train or Dispatching Service in BILLING CODE 4910–06–P Administration, DOT. the United States (NPRM) (49 CFR part ACTION: Notice of OMB approvals. 219). The expiration date for this information collection is January 31, SUMMARY: In compliance with the 2005. (6) OMB No. 2130–0556, U.S. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Locational Requirement For Dispatching U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and 5 CFR U.S. Rail Operations (49 CFR part 241).
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16146 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION enrollment in a Federal maritime and be submitted to: Docket training program. Management, Room PL–401, 400 Maritime Administration Annual Estimated Burden Hours: 20 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 1/2 hours. 20590. [Docket hours are from 9 am to Reports, Forms and Recordkeeping Comments are Invited on: (a) Whether 5 pm]. Requirements; Agency Information the proposed collection of information FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Collection Activity Under OMB Review is necessary for the proper performance George Entwistle, Office of Vehicle of the functions of the agency, including AGENCY: Maritime Administration, DOT. Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202–366– whether the information will have 5306). ACTION: Notice and request for practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the comments. agency’s estimate of the burden of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: proposed information collection; (c) SUMMARY: Background In compliance with the ways to enhance the quality, utility and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 clarity of the information to be Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice collected; and (d) ways to minimize the motor vehicle that was not originally announces that the Information burden of the collection of information manufactured to conform to all Collection abstracted below has been on respondents, including the use of applicable Federal motor vehicle safety forwarded to the Office of Management automated collection techniques or standards shall be refused admission and Budget (OMB) for review and other forms of information technology. into the United States unless NHTSA comment. The nature of the information A comment to OMB is best assured of has decided that the motor vehicle is collection is described as well as its having its full effect if OMB receives it substantially similar to a motor vehicle expected burden. The Federal Register within 30 days of publication. originally manufactured for importation Notice with a 60-day comment period into and sale in the United States, soliciting comments on the following Issued in Washington, DC, on April 1, 2002. certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and of collection of information was published the same model year as the model of the Joel C. Richard, on January 10, 2002. No comments were motor vehicle to be compared, and is received. Secretary, Maritime Administration. capable of being readily altered to [FR Doc. 02–8158 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] DATES: Comments must be submitted on conform to all applicable Federal motor or before May 6, 2002. BILLING CODE 4910–81–P vehicle safety standards. ADDRESSES: Send comments to the Petitions for eligibility decisions may be submitted by either manufacturers or Office of Information and Regulatory DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Affairs, Office of Management and importers who have registered with Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, National Highway Traffic Safety NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR part 592. As Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention Administration specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA MARAD Desk Officer. publishes notice in the Federal Register [Docket No. NHTSA–2002–11847] of each petition that it receives, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rita affords interested persons an Notice of Receipt of Petition for Jackson, Maritime Administration, opportunity to comment on the petition. Decision That Nonconforming 2001 MAR–250, 400 Seventh St., SW., At the close of the comment period, Audi A4 and S4 Passenger Cars Are Washington, DC 20590. Telephone: NHTSA decides, on the basis of the Eligible for Importation 202–366–0284, FAX: 202–493–2288, or petition and any comments that it has e-mail: [email protected]. AGENCY: National Highway Traffic received, whether the vehicle is eligible Copies of this collection can also be Safety Administration, DOT. for importation. The agency then obtained from that office. ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for publishes this decision in the Federal SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Maritime decision that nonconforming 2001 Audi Register. Administration (MARAD). A4 and S4 passenger cars are eligible for J.K. Technologies, L.L.C. of Baltimore, Title: Request for Waiver of Service importation. Maryland (‘‘J.K.’’) (Registered Importer Obligation; Request for Deferment of 90–006) has petitioned NHTSA to Service Obligation; Application for SUMMARY: This document announces decide whether 2001 Audi A4 and S4 Review of Waiver/Deferment Decisions. receipt by the National Highway Traffic passenger cars are eligible for OMB Control Number: 2133–0510. Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a importation into the United States. The Type of Request: Extension of petition for a decision that 2001 Audi vehicles which J.K. believes are currently approved collection. A4 and S4 passenger cars that were not substantially similar are 2001 Audi A4 Affected Public: Students and originally manufactured to comply with and S4 passenger cars that were graduates of the U.S. Merchant Marine all applicable Federal motor vehicle manufactured for importation into, and Academy and subsidized students or safety standards are eligible for sale in, the United States and certified graduates of the State maritime importation into the United States by their manufacturer as conforming to academies who request waivers of because (1) they are substantially all applicable Federal motor vehicle service obligations. similar to vehicles that were originally safety standards. Form(S): MA–935; MA–936; MA–937. manufactured for importation into and The petitioner claims that it carefully Abstract: This information collection sale in the United States and that were compared non-U.S. certified 2001 Audi is essential for determining if a student certified by their manufacturer as A4 and S4 passenger cars to their U.S.- or graduate of the U.S. Merchant Marine complying with the safety standards, certified counterparts, and found the Academy (USMMA) or subsidized and (2) they are capable of being readily vehicles to be substantially similar with student or graduate of a State maritime altered to conform to the standards. respect to compliance with most Federal academy has a waivable situation DATES: The closing date for comments motor vehicle safety standards. preventing them from fulfilling the on the petition is May 6, 2002. J.K. submitted information with its requirements of a service obligation ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to petition intended to demonstrate that contract signed at the time of their the docket number and notice number, non-U.S. certified 2001 Audi A4 and S4
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16147
passenger cars, as originally Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION manufactured for sale in Europe, Protection: inspection of all vehicles conform to many Federal motor vehicle and replacement of the driver’s and National Highway Traffic Safety safety standards in the same manner as passenger’s side air bags, knee bolsters, Administration their U.S. certified counterparts, or are control units, sensors, and seat belts capable of being readily altered to with U.S.-model components on [Docket No. NHTSA–2002–11881] conform to those standards. vehicles that are not already so Notice of Receipt of Petition for Specifically, the petitioner claims that equipped. Petitioner states that the front non-U.S. certified 2001 Audi A4 and S4 Decision That Nonconforming 1999 and rear outboard designated seating passenger cars are identical to their U.S. and 2001 BMW 3 Series Passenger positions have combination lap and certified counterparts with respect to Cars Are Eligible for Importation compliance with Standard Nos. 102 shoulder belts that are self-tensioning AGENCY: Transmission Shift Lever Sequence. and that release by means of a single red National Highway Traffic ***, 103 Defrosting and Defogging pushbutton. Petitioner further states that Safety Administration, DOT. Systems, 104 Windshield Wiping and the vehicles are equipped with a seat ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for Washing Systems, 105 Hydraulic Brake belt warning lamp and audible buzzer decision that nonconforming 1999 and Systems, 106 Brake Hoses, 109 New that are identical to components 2001 BMW 3 Series passenger cars are Pneumatic Tires, 113 Hood Latch installed on U.S.-certified models. eligible for importation. Systems, 116 Brake Fluid, 118 Power The petitioner states that all vehicles SUMMARY: This document announces Window Systems, 124 Accelerator will be inspected for compliance with receipt by the National Highway Traffic Control Systems, 135 Passenger Car the parts marking requirements of the Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a Brake Systems, 201 Occupant Protection Theft Prevention Standard at 49 CFR petition for a decision that 1999 and in Interior Impact, 202 Head Restraints, part 541, and will be marked as 2001 BMW 3 Series passenger cars that 204 Steering Control Rearward necessary. were not originally manufactured to Displacement, 205 Glazing Materials, comply with all applicable Federal 206 Door Locks and Door Retention The petitioner also states that a motor vehicle safety standards are Components, 207 Seating Systems, 209 vehicle identification plate must be eligible for importation into the United Seat Belt Assemblies, 210 Seat Belt affixed to the vehicles near the left States because (1) they are substantially Assembly Anchorages, 212 Windshield windshield post and a reference and similar to vehicles that were originally Retention, 214 Side Impact Protection, certification label must be affixed in the manufactured for importation into and 216 Roof Crush Resistance, 219 area of the left front door post to meet sale in the United States and that were Windshield Zone Intrusion, 301 Fuel the requirements of 49 CFR part 565. certified by their manufacturer as System Integrity, and 302 Flammability Interested persons are invited to complying with the safety standards, of Interior Materials. submit comments on the petition and (2) they are capable of being readily With regard to compliance with the described above. Comments should refer Bumper Standard found in 49 CFR part altered to conform to the standards. to the docket number and be submitted 581, the petitioner claims that the DATES: The closing date for comments to: Docket Management, Room PL–401, vehicles are equipped with bumpers on the petition is May 6, 2002. 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC and support structures identical to those ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to used on U.S. certified models. 20590. [Docket hours are from 9 am to the docket number and notice number, The petitioner also contends that the 5 pm]. It is requested but not required and be submitted to: Docket vehicles are capable of being readily that 10 copies be submitted. Management, Room PL–401, 400 altered to meet the following standards, All comments received before the Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC in the manner indicated: close of business on the closing date 20590. [Docket hours are from 9 am to Standard No. 101 Controls and indicated above will be considered, and 5 pm]. Displays: Replacement of the instrument will be available for examination in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: cluster with U.S.-model components. docket at the above address both before George Entwistle, Office of Vehicle Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective and after that date. To the extent Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202–366– Devices and Associated Equipment: (a) possible, comments filed after the 5306). Installation of U.S.-model headlamps closing date will also be considered. and front sidemarker lamps, (b) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of final action on the petition installation of U.S.-model taillamp Background assemblies that incorporate rear will be published in the Federal sidemarker lamps, (c) installation of a Register pursuant to the authority Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a U.S.-model high mounted stop lamp indicated below. motor vehicle that was not originally assembly if the vehicle is not already so Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A) and manufactured to conform to all equipped. (b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8; delegations of authority applicable Federal motor vehicle safety Standard No. 110 Tire Selection and at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8. standards shall be refused admission Rims: installation of a tire information into the United States unless NHTSA Issued on: April 1, 2002. placard. has decided that the motor vehicle is Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirror: Marilynne Jacobs, substantially similar to a motor vehicle replacement of the passenger side Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. originally manufactured for importation rearview mirror with a U.S.-model [FR Doc. 02–8144 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] into and sale in the United States, component. BILLING CODE 4910–59–P certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and of Standard No. 114 Theft Protection: the same model year as the model of the programming of the key warning system motor vehicle to be compared, and is at the time the instrument cluster is capable of being readily altered to changed and inspection at the time of conform to all applicable Federal motor conversion. vehicle safety standards.
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 16148 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices
Petitions for eligibility decisions may Assemblies, 210 Seat Belt Assembly passenger’s side air bags, knee bolsters, be submitted by either manufacturers or Anchorages, 212 Windshield Retention, control units, sensors, and seat belts importers who have registered with 216 Roof Crush Resistance, 219 with U.S.-model components on NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR part 592. As Windshield Zone Intrusion, 301 Fuel vehicles that are not already so specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA System Integrity, and 302 Flammability equipped. Petitioner states that the front publishes notice in the Federal Register of Interior Materials. and rear outboard designated seating of each petition that it receives, and With regard to compliance with the positions have combination lap and affords interested persons an Bumper Standard found in 49 CFR part shoulder belts that are self-tensioning 581, the petitioner claims that the opportunity to comment on the petition. and that release by means of a single red vehicles are equipped with bumpers At the close of the comment period, pushbutton. NHTSA decides, on the basis of the and support structures identical to those petition and any comments that it has used on U.S. certified models. Standard No. 214 Side Impact received, whether the vehicle is eligible The petitioner also contends that the Protection: Inspection of all vehicles for importation. The agency then vehicles are capable of being readily and installation of door bar on those not publishes this decision in the Federal altered to meet the following standards, already so equipped. The petitioner Register. in the manner indicated: states that the vehicles are equipped J.K. Technologies, L.L.C. of Baltimore, Standard No. 101 Controls and with side impact air bags and control Maryland (‘‘J.K.’’) (Registered Importer Displays: (a) Inscription of the word systems that are identical to those 90–006) has petitioned NHTSA to ‘‘brake’’ on the dash in place of the installed on U.S.-certified models. decide whether 1999 and 2001 BMW 3 international ECE warning symbol; (b) The petitioner states that all vehicles Series passenger cars are eligible for replacement of the speedometer with a importation into the United States. The unit reading in miles per hour; (c) where will be inspected for compliance with vehicles which J.K. believes are necessary, replacement of the the parts marking requirements of the substantially similar are 1999 and 2001 instrument cluster with a U.S.-model Theft Prevention Standard at 49 CFR BMW 3 Series passenger cars that were component, and reprogramming of the part 541, and will be marked as manufactured for importation into, and replacement unit to operate all necessary. sale in, the United States and certified necessary safety systems, such as The petitioner also states that a by their manufacturer, Bayerische chimes and warnings. vehicle identification plate must be Motoren Werke, A.G., as conforming to Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective affixed to the vehicles near the left all applicable Federal motor vehicle Devices and Associated Equipment: (a) windshield post and a reference and safety standards. Installation of U.S.-model headlamps certification label must be affixed in the The petitioner claims that it carefully and front sidemarker lamps, (b) area of the left front door post to meet compared non-U.S. certified 1999 and installation of U.S.-model taillamp the requirements of 49 CFR part 565. 2001 BMW 3 Series passenger cars to assemblies that incorporate rear their U.S.-certified counterparts, and sidemarker lamps, (c) installation of a Interested persons are invited to found the vehicles to be substantially U.S.-model high mounted stop lamp. submit comments on the petition similar with respect to compliance with The petitioner states that often only described above. Comments should refer most Federal motor vehicle safety headlights and taillights need to the docket number and be submitted standards. replacement for the vehicles to conform to: Docket Management, Room PL–401, J.K. submitted information with its to the standard. 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC petition intended to demonstrate that Standard No. 110 Tire Selection and 20590. [Docket hours are from 9 am to non-U.S. certified 1999 and 2001 BMW Rims: Installation of a tire information 5 pm]. It is requested but not required 3 Series passenger cars, as originally placard. that 10 copies be submitted. manufactured for sale in Europe, Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirror: conform to many Federal motor vehicle Replacement of the passenger side All comments received before the safety standards in the same manner as rearview mirror with a U.S.-model close of business on the closing date their U.S. certified counterparts, or are component, or inscription of the indicated above will be considered, and capable of being readily altered to required warning statement on that will be available for examination in the conform to those standards. mirror. docket at the above address both before Specifically, the petitioner claims that Standard No. 114 Theft Protection: and after that date. To the extent non-U.S. certified 1999 and 2001 BMW Reprogramming of the vehicle to actuate possible, comments filed after the 3 Series passenger cars are identical to the appropriate safety systems during closing date will also be considered. their U.S. certified counterparts with conversion of the dash. Notice of final action on the petition respect to compliance with Standard Standard No. 118 Power Window will be published in the Federal Nos. 102 Transmission Shift Lever Systems: Alteration of the power Register pursuant to the authority Sequence. * * *, 103 Defrosting and window system to operate the required indicated below. Defogging Systems, 104 Windshield defeat device during reprogramming of Wiping and Washing Systems, 105 the lights and dash. The petition states Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A) and (b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8; delegations of authority Hydraulic Brake Systems, 106 Brake that most vehicles have the required at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8. Hoses, 109 New Pneumatic Tires, 113 defeat devices as standard equipment. Hood Latch Systems, 116 Brake Fluid, Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash Issued on: April 1, 2002. 124 Accelerator Control Systems, 135 Protection: (a) Petitioner states that the Marilynne Jacobs, Passenger Car Brake Systems, 201 vehicles are equipped with a seat belt Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. Occupant Protection in Interior Impact, warning lamp that is identical to the [FR Doc. 02–8145 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] 202 Head Restraints, 204 Steering component installed on U.S.-certified Control Rearward Displacement, 205 models, but that the audible warning BILLING CODE 4910–59–P Glazing Materials, 206 Door Locks and buzzer must be programmed to meet the Door Retention Components, 207 standard.; (b) inspection of all vehicles Seating Systems, 209 Seat Belt and replacement of the driver’s and
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Notices 16149
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION received, whether the vehicle is eligible Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–375 for importation. The agency then 2. Docket No. NHTSA–2001–11211 National Highway Traffic Safety publishes this decision in the Federal Administration Nonconforming Vehicles: 2002 Harley Register. Davidson VRSCA motorcycles [Docket No. NHTSA–2002–11801] NHTSA received petitions from Substantially similar U.S.-certified vehicles: registered importers to decide whether 2002 Harley Davidson VRSCA Decision That Certain Nonconforming the vehicles listed in Annex A to this motorcycles Motor Vehicles Are Eligible for notice are eligible for importation into Notice of Petition Importation the United States. To afford an Published at: 67 FR 2951 (January 22, 2002) AGENCY: National Highway Traffic opportunity for public comment, Vehicle Eligibility Number: VSP–374 Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. NHTSA published notice of these petitions as specified in Annex A. The [FR Doc. 02–8146 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] ACTION: Notice of decision by NHTSA reader is referred to those notices for a BILLING CODE 4910–59–P that certain nonconforming motor thorough description of the petitions. vehicles are eligible for importation. No comments were received in response SUMMARY: to these notices. Based on its review of This document announces DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY decisions by NHTSA that certain motor the information submitted by the petitioners, NHTSA has decided to grant vehicles not originally manufactured to Submission for OMB Review; the petitions. comply with all applicable Federal Comment Request motor vehicle safety standards are Vehicle Eligibility Number for Subject eligible for importation into the United Vehicles March 27, 2002. States because they are substantially The Department of the Treasury has similar to vehicles originally The importer of a vehicle admissible submitted the following public manufactured for importation into and/ under any final decision must indicate information collection requirement(s) to or sale in the United States and certified on the form HS–7 accompanying entry OMB for review and clearance under the by their manufacturers as complying the appropriate vehicle eligibility Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, with the safety standards, and they are number indicating that the vehicle is Public Law 104–13. Copies of the capable of being readily altered to eligible for entry. Vehicle eligibility submission(s) may be obtained by conform to the standards. numbers assigned to vehicles admissible calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance DATES: These decisions are effective as under this decision are specified in Officer listed. Comments regarding this of the date of their publication in the Annex A. information collection should be Federal Register. Final Decision addressed to the OMB reviewer listed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and to the Treasury Department George Entwistle, Office of Vehicle Accordingly, on the basis of the Clearance Officer, Department of the Safety Compliance, NHTSA (202–366– foregoing, NHTSA hereby decides that Treasury, Room 2110, 1425 New York 5306). each motor vehicle listed in Annex A to Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220. this notice, which was not originally SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DATES: Written comments should be manufactured to comply with all received on or before May 6, 2002 to be Background applicable Federal motor vehicle safety assured of consideration. Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a standards, is substantially similar to a motor vehicle that was not originally motor vehicle manufactured for Internal Revenue Service (IRS) importation into and/or sale in the manufactured to conform to all OMB Number: 1545–1420. applicable Federal motor vehicle safety United States, and certified under 49 Form Number: IRS Form 8849. standards shall be refused admission U.S.C. 30115, as specified in Annex A, into the United States unless NHTSA and is capable of being readily altered Type of Review: Extension. has decided that the motor vehicle is to conform to all applicable Federal Title: Claim for Refund of Excise substantially similar to a motor vehicle motor vehicle safety standards. Taxes. originally manufactured for importation Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A) and Description: Internal Revenue Code into and sale in the United States, (b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8; delegations of authority (IRC) sections 6402, 6404, and sections certified under 49 U.S.C. 30115, and of at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8. 301.6402–2, 301–6404–1, and 301– the same model year as the model of the Issued on: April 1, 2002. 6404–3 of the regulations, allow for motor vehicle to be compared, and is Marilynne Jacobs, refunds of taxes (except income taxes) capable of being readily altered to Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. or refund, abatement, or credit of conform to all applicable Federal motor interest, penalties, and additions to tax vehicle safety standards. Annex A in the event of errors or certain actions Petitions for eligibility decisions may Nonconforming Motor Vehicles Decided To by IRS. Form 8849 is used by taxpayers be submitted by either manufacturers or to claim refunds of excise taxes. importers who have registered with Be Eligible for Importation Respondents: Business or other for- NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR part 592. As 1. Docket No. NHTSA–2001–11210 profit, individuals or households, not- specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA Nonconforming Vehicle: 1991 Cadillac for-profit institutions, farms, Federal publishes notice in the Federal Register Seville passenger cars Government, State, Local or Tribal of each petition that it receives, and Substantially similar Government. affords interested persons an U.S.-certified vehicle: 1991 Cadillac Seville opportunity to comment on the petition. passenger cars Estimated Number of Respondents/ At the close of the comment period, Notice of Petition Recordkeepers: 125,292. NHTSA decides, on the basis of the Published at: 67 FR 2952 (January 22, Estimated Burden Hours Per petition and any comments that it has 2002) Respondent/Recordkeeper:
VerDate 11
Preparing, copying as- Form/Schedule Recordkeeping Learning about the law sembling, and sending or the form the form to the IRS
Form 8849 ...... 3 hr., 35 min...... 30 min...... 34 min. Schedule 1 ...... 11 hr., 57 min...... 12 min. Schedule 2 ...... 7 hr., 39 min...... 12 min...... 19 min. Schedule 3 ...... 3 hr., 21 min...... 3 min. Schedule 4 ...... 4 hr., 46 min...... 4 min. Schedule 5 ...... 5 hr., 15 min...... 6 min...... 11 min. Schedule 6 ...... 4 hr., 32 min...... 12 min...... 16 min.
Frequency of Response: Quarterly, statements required to be filed would be Clearance Officer: Glenn Kirkland, Annually. used to verify that taxpayers are Internal Revenue Service, Room 6411, Estimated Total Reporting/ complying with requirements imposed 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Recordkeeping Burden: 1,841,954 hours. by Congress under Subchapter S. Washington, DC 20224. Clearance Officer: Glenn Kirkland, Respondents: Business or other for- OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6411, profit, individuals or households. (202) 395–7860, Office of Management 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Estimated Number of Respondents: and Budget, Room 10202, New Washington, DC 20224. 1,005 . Executive Office Building, Washington, OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt, Estimated Burden Hours Per DC 20503. (202) 395–7860, Office of Management Respondent: 1 hour. Mary A. Able, and Budget, Room 10202, New Frequency of Response: Other (Non- Executive Office Building, Washington, recurring). Departmental Reports Management Officer. DC 20503. Estimated Total Reporting Burden: [FR Doc. 02–8180 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] 1,005 hours. BILLING CODE 4830–01–P Mary A. Able, OMB Number: 1545–0854. Departmental Reports Management Officer. Regulation Project Number: LR–1214 [FR Doc. 02–8179 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] Final. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS BILLING CODE 4830–01–P Type of Review: Extension. AFFAIRS Title: Discharge of Liens. Description: The Internal Revenue President’s Task Force To Improve DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Service needs this information to Health Care Delivery for Our Nation’s Veterans; Notice of Meeting Submission for OMB Review; determine if the taxpayer has equity in Comment Request the property. This information will be The Department of Veterans Affairs used to determine the amount, if any, to (VA) gives notice under Public Law 92– March 28, 2002. which the tax lien attaches. 463 that a meeting of the President’s The Department of Treasury has Respondents: Business or other for- Task Force to Improve Health Care submitted the following public profit, Individuals or households, Delivery for Our Nation’s Veterans is information collection requirement(s) to Farms. scheduled to take place on Wednesday, OMB for review and clearance under the Estimated Number of Respondents: April 10, 2002, beginning at 8:30 a.m. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 500. and ending at 5:30 p.m. The meeting Public Law 104–13. Copies of the Estimated Burden Hours Per will be held in Salon A or B, the Four submission(s) may be obtained by Respondent: 24 minutes. Seasons Hotel, 2400 Pennsylvania calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance Frequency of Response: On occasion. Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, and is Officer listed. Comments regarding this Estimated Total Reporting Burden: open to the general public. information collection should be 200 hours. The purpose of the Task Force is to: addressed to the OMB reviewer listed OMB Number: 1545–1638. (a) Identify ways to improve benefits and to the Treasury Department Form Number: IRS Form 12196 and services for Department of Veterans Clearance Officer, Department of the (formerly Form 7130–A). Affairs (VA) beneficiaries and for Treasury, Room 2110, 1425 New York Type of Review: Revision. Department of Defense (DOD) military Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220. Title: Small Business Office Order retirees who are also eligible for benefits DATES: Written comments should be Blank. from VA, through better coordination of received on or before May 6, 2002 to be Description: Form 12196 is to be used the activities of the two departments; assured of consideration. by small business outlets to order IRS (b) Review barriers and challenges tax forms and publications. The form that impede VA and DOD coordination, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) can be faxed directly to the IRS Area including budgeting processes, timely OMB Number: 1545–0731. Distribution Center for order fulfillment, billing, cost accounting information Regulation Project Number: PS–262– packaging and mailing. technology, and reimbursement. 82 Final. Respondents: Business or other for- Identify opportunities to improve such Type of Review: Extension. profit. business practices to ensure quality and Title: Definition of an S Corporation. Estimated Number of Respondents: cost effective health care; and Description: The regulations provide 45. (c) Identify opportunities for the procedures and the statements to be Estimated Burden Hours Per improved resource utilization through filed by certain individuals for making Respondent: 3 minutes. partnership between VA and DOD to the election under section 1361(d)(2), Frequency of Response: On occasion. maximize the use of resources and the refusal to consent to that election, or Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 2 infrastructure, including: buildings, the revocation of that election. The hours. information technology and data sharing
VerDate 11
systems, procurement of supplies, acquisition and procurement, facilities, Wilson Boulevard, 4th Floor, Arlington, equipment and services, and delivery of information management and Virginia, 22209. care. information technology, leadership and By Direction of the Secretary. As the Task Force work groups productivity, pharmaceuticals, and continue to obtain current and updated resource and budgeting process. Dated: March 27, 2002. information and to validate and/or Interested parties can provide written Nora E. Egan, clarify that information, the work comments to Mr. Dan Amon, Committee Management Officer. groups will make presentations on their Communications Director, President’s [FR Doc. 02–8121 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] related topics to the members. The work Task Force to Improve Health Care BILLING CODE 8320–01–M groups include benefit services, Delivery to Our Nation’s Veterans, 1401
VerDate Mar<13>2002 11:53 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\04APN1.SGM pfrm03 PsN: 04APN1 Thursday, April 4, 2002
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Part 63 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing and Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing; Proposed Rule
VerDate 11
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Attention Docket Number A–96–04, information is not inadvertently placed AGENCY U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, in the docket: Attention: Mr. Randy NW., Washington, DC 20460. In person McDonald, c/o OAQPS Document 40 CFR Part 63 or by courier, deliver comments (in Control Officer (Room 740B), U.S. EPA, [FRL–7150–8] duplicate if possible) to: Air and 411 W. Chapel Hill Street, Durham, NC Radiation Docket and Information 27701. The EPA will disclose RIN 2060–AE82 Center (6102), Attention Docket Number information identified as CBI only to the A–96–04, U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW, extent allowed by the procedures set National Emission Standards for Washington, DC 20460. The EPA forth in 40 CFR part 2. If no claim of Hazardous Air Pollutants: requests a separate copy also be sent to Miscellaneous Organic Chemical confidentiality accompanies a the contact person listed below (see FOR Manufacturing and Miscellaneous submission when it is received by the FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Coating Manufacturing EPA, the information may be made Public Hearing: If a public hearing is available to the public without further AGENCY: Environmental Protection held, it will be held in the EPA Office notice to the commenter. of Administration Auditorium, Research Agency (EPA). Public Hearing. Persons interested in Triangle Park, North Carolina, or at an ACTION: Proposed rule. presenting oral testimony or inquiring alternate site nearby. as to whether a hearing is to be held SUMMARY: This action proposes national Docket: Docket No. A–96–04 contains should contact Ms. Maria Noell at least emission standards for hazardous air supporting information used in 2 days in advance of the public hearing. pollutants (NESHAP) for the developing the NESHAP. The docket is Persons interested in attending the Miscellaneous Organic Chemical located at the U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, Manufacturing source category and the SW., Washington, DC 20460 in room M– public hearing must also call Ms. Noell Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing 1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor), to verify the time, date, and location of source category. The Miscellaneous and may be inspected from 8:30 a.m. to the hearing. The public hearing will Organic Chemical Manufacturing source 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, provide interested parties the category includes many previously excluding legal holidays. opportunity to present data, views, or unregulated organic chemical FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For arguments concerning these proposed processing units at major sources. The information about the proposed NESHAP. Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing NESHAP, contact Mr. Randy McDonald, Docket. The docket is an organized source category includes the Organic Chemicals Group, Emission and complete file of all the information manufacture of a number of coatings Standards Division (MD–13), U.S. EPA, considered by the EPA in the including paints, inks, and adhesives. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, development of these proposed The EPA has determined that both 27711, telephone number (919) 541– NESHAP. The docket is a dynamic file source categories include facilities that 5402, electronic mail address because material is added throughout are major sources of hazardous air [email protected]. For the rulemaking process. The docketing pollutants (HAP), including toluene, information about the public hearing, system is intended to allow members of methanol, xylene, hydrogen chloride, contact Ms. Maria Noell, Organic the public and industries involved to and methylene chloride. Methylene Chemicals Group, Emission Standards readily identify and locate documents chloride is considered to be a probable Division (MD–13), U.S. EPA, Research so that they can effectively participate human carcinogen and the other Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, in the rulemaking process. Along with pollutants can cause noncancer health telephone number (919) 541–5607, the proposed and promulgated NESHAP effects in humans. These proposed electronic mail address and their preambles, the contents of the NESHAP will implement section 112(d) [email protected]. docket will serve as the record in the of the Clean Air Act (CAA) by requiring SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: case of judicial review. (See section all major sources in the relevant source Comments: Comments and data may be 307(d)(7)(A) of the CAA.) The regulatory categories to meet HAP emission submitted by electronic mail (e-mail) to: text and other materials related to these limitations and work practice standards [email protected]. Electronic proposed NESHAP are available for reflecting the application of the comments must be submitted either as review in the docket or copies may be maximum achievable control an ASCII file to avoid the use of special mailed on request from the Air Docket technology (MACT). The proposed characters and encryption problems or by calling (202) 260–7548. A reasonable subpart FFFF will reduce HAP on disks in WordPerfect version 5.1, fee may be charged for copying docket emissions by approximately 28,000 6.1 or Corel 8 file format. All comments materials. Megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (30,900 and data submitted in electronic form Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition tons per year (tpy)), and proposed must note the docket number: A–96–04. to being available in the docket, an subpart HHHHH will reduce HAP No confidential business information electronic copy of this proposed emissions by approximately 5,670 Mg/ (CBI) should be submitted by e-mail. NESHAP will also be available on the yr (6,250 tpy). Electronic comments may be filed WWW through the Technology Transfer DATES: Comments: Submit comments on online at many Federal Depository Network (TTN). Following the or before June 3, 2002. Libraries. Administrator’s signature, a copy of the Public Hearing: If anyone contacts the Commenters wishing to submit proposed NESHAP will be posted on the EPA requesting to speak at a public proprietary information for TTN’s policy and guidance page for hearing by April 24, 2002, a public consideration must clearly distinguish newly proposed or promulgated rules at hearing will be held at 10 a.m. on May such information from other comments http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN 6, 2002. and clearly label it as CBI. Send provides information and technology ADDRESSES: Comments: By U.S. Postal submissions containing such exchange in various areas of air Service, send comments (in duplicate if proprietary information directly to the pollution control. If more information possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket following address, and not to the public regarding the TTN is needed, call the and Information Center (6102), docket, to ensure that proprietary TTN HELP line at (919) 541–5384.
VerDate 11
Regulated Entities. Categories and action include those listed in the entities potentially regulated by this following table.
Category SIC NAICS Examples of regulated entities
Industry ...... 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 3251, 3252, 3253, 3254, 3255, 3256, Producers of specialty organic chemi- 287, 289, 386. 3259, except 325131 and 325181. cals, paints, coatings, adhesives, inks, explosives, certain polymers and res- ins, and certain pesticide intermedi- ates.
This table is not intended to be G. How did we select the notification, sources. The CAA requires the NESHAP exhaustive, but rather provides a guide recordkeeping, and reporting to reflect the maximum degree of for readers regarding entities likely to be requirements? reduction in emissions of HAP that is regulated by this action. To determine H. What is the relationship of these achievable, taking into consideration the proposed NESHAP to other rules? cost of achieving the emissions whether your facility is regulated by this I. What types of comments are being action, you should examine the specifically requested by the reductions, any nonair quality health applicability criteria in § 63.2435 and Administrator? and environmental impacts, and energy § 63.7985 of the proposed NESHAP. If IV. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and requirements. This level of control is you have any questions regarding the Economic Impacts commonly referred to as MACT. applicability of this action to a A. Miscellaneous Organic Chemical The MACT floor is the minimum particular entity, consult the person Manufacturing control level allowed for NESHAP and listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER B. Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing is defined under section 112(d)(3) of the V. Administrative Requirements INFORMATION CONTACT section. CAA. In essence, the MACT floor A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory ensures that all major sources achieve Outline. The information presented in Planning and Review the level of control already achieved by this preamble is organized as follows: B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism C. Executive Order 13175, Consultation the better-controlled and lower-emitting I. Background sources in each source category or A. What is the source of authority for and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments subcategory. For new sources, the development of NESHAP? MACT floor cannot be less stringent B. What criteria are used in the D. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health than the emission control that is development of NESHAP? Risks and Safety Risks C. What is the history of the source achieved in practice by the best- E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 categories? controlled similar source. The MACT F. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as D. What are the health effects associated standards for existing sources can be Amended by the Small Business with the pollutants emitted from the less stringent than standards for new Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of sources, but they cannot be less Miscellaneous Organic Chemical 1966 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. Manufacturing and the Miscellaneous G. Paperwork Reduction Act stringent than the average emission Coating Manufacturing source H. National Technology Transfer and limitation achieved by the best- categories? Advancement Act performing 12 percent of existing II. Summary of the Proposed NESHAP I. Executive Order 13211, Actions sources (or the best-performing 5 A. What source categories and Concerning Regulations that sources for categories or subcategories subcategories are affected by these Significantly Affect Energy Supply, with fewer than 30 sources). proposed NESHAP? Distribution or Use In developing MACT, we also B. What are the primary sources of consider control options that are more emissions and what are the emissions? I. Background C. What is the affected source? stringent than the floor. In considering D. What are the emission limits, operating A. What Is the Source of Authority for whether to establish standards more limits, and other standards? Development of NESHAP? stringent than the floor, we must E. What are the testing and initial Section 112 of the CAA requires us to consider cost, nonair quality health and compliance requirements? list categories and subcategories of environmental impacts, and energy F. What are the continuous compliance major sources and some area sources of requirements. provisions? HAP, and to establish NESHAP for the G. What are the notification, C. What Is the History of the Source recordkeeping, and reporting listed source categories and Categories? subcategories. The categories of major requirements? 1. Initial Source Categories H. How will the proposed subpart FFFF be sources covered by today’s proposed incorporated into Title V permits? NESHAP are described in section I.C. Section 112 of the CAA requires us to III. Rationale for Selecting Proposed Emission Major sources of HAP are those that are establish rules for categories of emission Limitations and Work Practice Standards located within a contiguous area and sources that emit HAP. On July 16, A. How did we select the source under common control and have the 1992, we published an initial list of 174 categories? potential to emit greater than 9.1 Mg/yr source categories to be regulated (57 FR B. How did we select the affected source? (10 tons/yr) of any one HAP or 22.7 Mg/ 31576). The listing was our best attempt C. How did we determine the basis and yr (25 tons/yr) of any combination of to identify major sources of HAP by level of the proposed standards for HAP. manufacturing category. Following the existing and new sources? publication of this listing, we published D. How did we select the format of the B. What Criteria Are Used in the a schedule for the promulgation of standards? Development of NESHAP? E. How did we select the testing and initial emission standards for each of the 174 compliance requirements? Section 112 of the CAA requires that listed source categories. At the time the F. How did we select the continuous we establish NESHAP for the control of initial list was published, we recognized compliance requirements? HAP from both new and existing major that we might have to revise the list
VerDate 11
from time to time as better information which HAP are used only as solvents. proposed NESHAP, which set MACT became available. The Miscellaneous Organic Chemical standards for two separate source Processes source category would also categories in the proposed subparts 2. Changes to the Initial List cover production of pesticide FFFF and HHHHH of 40 CFR part 63. Based on information we collected in intermediates that are not covered by D. What Are the Health Effects 1995, we realized that several of the the Pesticide Active Ingredient Associated With the Pollutants Emitted original source categories on the list had NESHAP, as well as materials not From Miscellaneous Organic Chemical similar process equipment, emission considered primary products under the Manufacturing and Miscellaneous characteristics and applicable control Group I and IV Polymers and Resins Coating Manufacturing Source technologies. Additionally, many of NESHAP. In addition to the 21 listed Categories? these source categories were on the source categories, two other source same schedule for promulgation, by categories are to be subsumed into the Today’s proposed NESHAP protect air November 15, 2000. Therefore, we Miscellaneous Organic Chemical quality and promote the public health decided to combine a number of source Processes source category. These are by reducing emissions of some of the categories from the original listing into quaternary ammonium compounds HAP listed in section 112(b)(1) of the one broad set of emission standards. On production and ammonium sulfate CAA. The HAP emitted by the November 7, 1996, we published a production from caprolactam by- Miscellaneous Organic Chemical notice combining 21 source categories product plants. Manufacturing and Miscellaneous from the initial list of 174 into the Coating Manufacturing source categories Miscellaneous Organic Chemical 3. Grouping Into Two Source Categories include but are not limited to methanol, Processes source category (61 FR On November 18, 1999, we published hydrogen chloride, cresols, methylene 57602). a Federal Register notice describing chloride, methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), Twelve of the 21 source categories changes to the source category list (64 toluene, vinyl acetate, xylene, hydrogen were listed under the miscellaneous FR 63035). At that time, we also fluoride, hexane, and methyl chloride. process industry group on the initial described our intent to group the source Exposure to these compounds has been list. These include: categories into two new source demonstrated to cause adverse health benzyltrimethylammonium chloride categories instead of one. The two new effects. production, carbonyl sulfide source categories are called the The HAP that would be controlled production, chelating agents ‘‘Miscellaneous Organic Chemical with these NESHAP are associated with production, chlorinated paraffins Manufacturing’’ source category and the a variety of adverse health effects. These production, ethylidene norbornene ‘‘Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing’’ adverse health effects include chronic production, explosives production, source category. During our review of (long-term) health disorders (e.g., hydrazine production, photographic the data, we decided that the emission irritation and damage to nasal chemicals production, phthalate sources in the miscellaneous coating membranes; damage to the liver, plasticizers production, rubber manufacturing industry should be kidneys, and testicles) and acute health chemicals production, symmetrical regulated differently from other disorders (e.g., irritation of eyes, throat, tetrachloropyridine production, and miscellaneous organic chemical and mucous membranes; dizziness, OBPA/1,3-diisocyanate production. processes because their emission stream headache, and nausea). Three of the Eight of the 21 source categories were could be characterized more narrowly HAP have been classified as probable or listed under the polymers and resins and standards could be tailored for possible human carcinogens. industry group. These include: alkyd these characteristics. For example, We do not have the type of current resins production, polyester resins coatings manufacturing involves mixing detailed data on each of the facilities production, polyvinyl alcohol and blending of raw materials at covered by the Miscellaneous Organic production, polyvinyl acetate emulsions ambient temperatures. Emissions from Chemical Manufacturing and production, polyvinylbutyral these operations generally result from Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing production, polymerized vinylidene the displacement of materials during NESHAP, and the people living around chloride production, processing. Therefore, the proposed the facilities, that would be necessary to polymethylmethacrylate production, standards for process vents from conduct an analysis to determine the and maleic anhydride copolymers coatings process vessels are tailored to actual population exposures to the HAP production. The last of the 21 source specific condenser controls operating on emitted from these facilities and categories is the manufacture of paints, saturated streams at ambient conditions. potential for resultant health effects. coatings, and adhesives. Conversely, organic chemical Therefore, we do not know the extent to Along with these 21 source categories, manufacturing involves chemical which the adverse health effects the Miscellaneous Organic Chemical reactions and separation processes described above occur in the Processes category was also defined in conducted at elevated temperatures. populations surrounding these facilities. the Federal Register notice to include Emissions from these processes result However, to the extent the adverse organic chemical manufacturing defined from exothermic reactions, vessel effects do occur, the NESHAP will by SIC codes 282, 284, 285, 286, 287, heating, gas sparging, depressurizations, reduce emissions and subsequent 289, and 386 which are not being displacements, as well as other events, exposures. covered by any other MACT standard. and emission stream characteristics vary Acute (short-term) or chronic (long- One example is the coverage of batch in concentration, flowrate, and term) exposure of humans to methanol process vents from reactors in the temperature. Because emission stream by inhalation or ingestion may result in synthetic organic chemical characteristics vary extensively in the blurred vision, headache, dizziness, and manufacturing industry (SOCMI) that broader source category, the compliance nausea. No information is available on are excluded from the provisions of the options are structured to accommodate the reproductive, developmental, or Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON). a wide range of conditions. The carcinogenic effects of methanol in Another example, also an exclusion in difference in conditions and emission humans. Birth defects have been the HON, is the coverage of HAP characteristics between the two source observed in the offspring of rats and emissions from SOCMI processes in categories provides the basis for today’s mice exposed to methanol by
VerDate 11
inhalation. A methanol inhalation study inconclusive regarding methylene classified vinyl acetate for using rhesus monkeys reported a chloride and cancer. Animal studies carcinogenicity. decrease in the length of pregnancy and have shown increases in liver and lung Acute inhalation of mixed xylenes (a limited evidence of impaired learning cancer and benign mammary gland mixture of three closely related ability in offspring. We have not tumors following the inhalation of compounds) in humans may cause classified methanol with respect to methylene chloride. We have classified irritation of the nose and throat, nausea, carcinogenicity. methylene chloride as a Group B2, vomiting, gastric irritation, mild Hydrogen chloride, also called probable human carcinogen. transient eye irritation, and neurological hydrochloric acid, is corrosive to the Acute inhalation exposure to MEK in effects. Chronic inhalation of xylenes in eyes, skin, and mucous membranes. humans results in irritation to the eyes, humans may result in nervous system Acute inhalation exposure may cause nose, and throat. Limited information is effects such as headache, dizziness, eye, nose, and respiratory tract irritation available on the chronic effects of MEK fatigue, tremors, and incoordination. and inflammation and pulmonary in humans. Chronic inhalation studies Other reported effects include labored edema in humans. Dermal contact may in animals have reported slight breathing, heart palpitation, severe chest produce severe burns, ulceration, and neurological, liver, kidney, and pain, abnormal electrocardiograms, and scarring. Chronic occupational exposure respiratory effects. No information is possible effects on the blood and to hydrochloric acid has been reported available on the developmental, kidneys. to cause gastritis, bronchitis, and reproductive, or carcinogenic effects of Acute inhalation exposure to gaseous dermatitis in workers. Prolonged MEK in humans. Developmental effects, hydrogen fluoride can cause respiratory exposure to low concentrations may including decreased fetal weight and damage in humans, including severe also cause dental discoloration and fetal malformations, have been reported irritation and pulmonary edema. erosion. No information is available on in mice and rats exposed to MEK via Chronic exposure to fluoride at low the reproductive or developmental inhalation and ingestion. We have levels has a beneficial effect of dental effects of hydrochloric acid in humans. classified MEK in Group D, not cavity prevention and may also be In rats exposed to hydrochloric acid by classifiable as to human carcinogenicity. useful for the treatment of osteoporosis. inhalation, altered estrus cycles have Acute inhalation of toluene by Exposure to higher levels of fluoride been reported in females, and increased humans may cause effects to the central through drinking water may cause fetal mortality and decreased fetal nervous system, such as fatigue, dental fluorosis or mottling, while very weight have been reported in offspring. sleepiness, headache, and nausea, as high exposures through drinking water We have not classified hydrochloric well as irregular heartbeat. People who or air can result in skeletal fluorosis. acid for carcinogenicity. abuse toluene-based products by The only developmental effect observed Acute inhalation exposure by humans deliberately inhaling their vapors have from fluoride exposure in humans is to mixed cresols results in respiratory shown adverse nervous system effects. dental fluorosis which can occur in a tract irritation, with symptoms such as Symptoms include tremors, decreased child’s teeth when a mother receives dryness, nasal constriction, and throat brain size, involuntary eye movements, high levels of fluoride during irritation. Cresols are also strong dermal and impaired speech, hearing, and pregnancy. One study reported irritants. No information is available on vision. Chronic inhalation exposure of menstrual irregularities in women the chronic effects of mixed cresols in humans to lower levels of toluene also occupationally exposed to fluoride. We humans, but animal studies have causes irritation of the upper respiratory have not classified hydrogen fluoride for reported effects on the blood, liver, tract, eye irritation, sore throat, nausea, carcinogenicity. kidney, and central nervous system, and dizziness, headaches, and difficulty Acute inhalation exposure of humans reduced body weight from oral and with sleep. Studies of children of to high levels of hexane causes mild inhalation exposure to mixed cresols. pregnant women exposed by inhalation central nervous system effects, No information is available on the to toluene or to mixed solvents have including dizziness, giddiness, slight reproductive or developmental effects of reported nervous system problems, nausea, and headache. Chronic mixed cresols in humans. Animal facial and limb abnormalities, and exposure to hexane in air causes studies with oral exposure have delayed development. However, these numbness in the extremities, muscular reported developmental effects, but only effects may not be attributable to weakness, blurred vision, headache, and at doses toxic to the mother, and no toluene alone. fatigue. One study reported testicular reproductive effects. Only anecdotal Acute inhalation exposure of workers damage in rats exposed to hexane information is available on the to vinyl acetate has resulted in eye and through inhalation. No information is carcinogenic effects of mixed cresols in upper respiratory tract irritation. available on the carcinogenic effects of humans. Several animal studies suggest Chronic occupational exposure results hexane in humans or animals. We have that individual cresol compounds (o- in upper respiratory tract irritation, classified hexane in Group D, not cresol, m-cresol, and p-cresol) may act cough, and/or hoarseness. Nasal classifiable as to human carcinogenicity. as tumor promoters. We have classified epithelial lesions and irritation and Acute exposure to high o-cresol, m-cresol, and p-cresol as inflammation of the respiratory tract concentrations of methyl chloride in Group C, possible human carcinogens. were observed in mice and rats humans has caused severe neurological Acute exposure to methylene chloride chronically exposed by inhalation. No effects including convulsions, coma, by inhalation affects the nervous information is available on the and death. Methyl chloride has also system, causing decreased visual, reproductive, developmental, or caused effects on heart rate, blood auditory, and motor functions. These carcinogenic effects of vinyl acetate in pressure, liver, and kidneys in humans. effects are reversible once exposure humans. Some limited animal data Chronic animal studies have shown ceases. The effects of chronic exposure suggest reduced body weight, fetal liver, kidney, spleen, and central to methylene chloride suggest that the growth retardation, and minor skeletal nervous system effects. No studies are central nervous system is a potential fetal defects at high exposure levels. An available concerning developmental or target in both humans and animals. increased incidence of nasal cavity reproductive effects of methyl chloride Limited animal studies have reported tumors has been observed in rats in humans. Inhalation studies have developmental effects. Human data are exposed by inhalation. We have not demonstrated that methyl chloride
VerDate 11
causes reproductive effects in male rats, operate a process, equipment continuous process vents, we reference with effects including testicular lesions components, and associated storage the process vent standards contained in and decreased sperm production. tanks. 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS. Human cancer data are limited. Animal The affected source for the For both continuous and batch studies have noted kidney tumors in Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing process vents, we are proposing to allow male mice. We have classified methyl source category is the miscellaneous you to comply by combusting streams in chloride as a Group C, possible human coating manufacturing operations at the hazardous waste incinerators that carcinogen. facility. These operations include comply with the requirements of the storage tanks, process vessels, Resource Conservation and Recovery II. Summary of the Proposed NESHAP equipment components, wastewater Act (RCRA) or in boilers, flares, or A. What Source Categories and treatment and conveyance systems, process heaters that meet certain design Subcategories Are Affected by These transfer operations, and ancillary and operating requirements. Proposed NESHAP? sources such as heat exchange systems. Additionally, you must also achieve less than 20 ppmv halogen or hydrogen D. What Are the Emission Limitations, As noted in section I.C of this halide concentration if you demonstrate Operating Limitations and Other preamble, we are creating two new compliance with the 20 ppmv TOC Standards? source categories from the combination alternative standard or the 20 ppmv of several existing source categories. The proposed emission limitations TOC concentration limit standards. These two source categories, which are and work practice standards are in The proposed new source standards affected by today’s proposed NESHAP, Tables 1 through 8 of the proposed for batch and continuous process vents are called the ‘‘Miscellaneous Organic subpart FFFF and Tables 1 through 7 of follow the same formats as described Chemical Manufacturing’’ source the proposed subpart HHHHH and are above. However, the applicability category and the ‘‘Miscellaneous summarized below. triggers are more stringent. All batch Coating Manufacturing’’ source vents within a process for which the category. There are no subcategories. 1. Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing Source Category uncontrolled emissions from batch vents exceed 1,360 kg/yr (3,000 lb/yr) B. What Are the Primary Sources of We are proposing separate standards Emissions and What Are the Emissions? must be reduced by either 98 percent for batch and continuous process vents. using a control device or 95 percent The sources of emissions at both For batch process vents, the proposed using a recovery device. All continuous source categories are process vents, standards would require you to reduce process vents with a TRE of less than or storage tanks, equipment leaks, transfer uncontrolled HAP emissions from the equal to 5.0 must be controlled by 98 operations, and wastewater systems. sum of all batch process vents within percent. The same options for control Total baseline HAP emissions (i.e., the the process by 98 percent if using hazardous waste incinerators, current level of control) for the uncontrolled emissions exceed 4,540 other combustion devices, and the Miscellaneous Organic Chemical kilograms per year (kg/yr) (10,000 alternative and concentration standards Manufacturing source category are pounds per year (lb/yr)). No control of are also available for new sources. estimated to be on the order of 44,700 vents would be required for processes We are proposing storage tank Mg/yr (49,300 tons/yr). Emissions from that are limited to uncontrolled standards that would require existing equipment leaks account for the largest emissions of 4,540 kg/yr (10,000 lb/yr), sources to control emissions from fraction of emissions, or approximately as calculated on a rolling 365-day basis. storage tanks having capacities greater 46 percent of the total. Emissions from A second control option that we are than or equal to 38 cubic meters (m3) process vents and wastewater systems proposing today for batch vents is to (10,000 gallons (gal)) and storing account for approximately 25 percent reduce the sum of all batch process material with a HAP partial pressure of and 28 percent of the total, respectively. vents within the process by 95 percent greater than 6.9 kilopascals (kPa) (1.0 Emissions from storage tanks and using recovery devices. You may also pound per square inch absolute (psia)). transfer operations account for less than comply with the alternative standard, For new sources, the proposed 1 percent of the total. which requires you to achieve specified standards would require control of Total baseline HAP emissions for the outlet concentrations for total organic storage tanks having capacities greater Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing compounds (TOC) and total hydrogen than or equal to 38 m3 (10,000 gal) and source category are estimated to be halides and halogens on a continuous storing material with a HAP partial 7,780 Mg/yr (8,580 tons/yr). Emissions basis. Both emission limits are 20 parts pressure of greater than 0.7 kPa (0.1 from mixing vessels and equipment per million by volume (ppmv) for psia). For both existing and new leaks make up nearly 86 percent and 13 combustion devices, and 50 ppmv for sources, the required control would be percent of the total, respectively; less noncombustion devices. We defined the to use a floating roof or to reduce the than 1 percent of the emissions are from term ‘‘process’’ to include all equipment organic HAP emissions by 95 percent by wastewater, transfer operations, and which collectively functions to produce weight or more. storage tanks. a material or family of materials that are The proposed standards for covered by the source category. wastewater, transfer operations, C. What Is the Affected Source? For continuous process vents, the maintenance wastewater, and heat The affected source for the proposed standards would require exchange systems are identical to those Miscellaneous Organic Chemical control of vents determined to have a required under the HON. At existing Manufacturing source category is the total resource effectiveness (TRE) index sources, control would be required for facilitywide collection of miscellaneous equal to or less than 2.6. The proposed wastewater streams with HAP listed on organic chemical manufacturing process standards would require you to reduce Table 9 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart G units (MCPU), wastewater treatment and HAP emissions by at least 98 percent by (Table 9 HAP), if the concentration conveyance systems, transfer operations weight if the TRE of the outlet gaseous exceeds 1,000 parts per million by and associated ancillary equipment stream after the last recovery device is weight (ppmw) and the flow exceeds 10 such as heat exchange systems. The above 2.6, or to reduce the outlet TOC liters per minute (lpm), or if the MCPU includes equipment necessary to concentration to 20 ppmv or less. For concentration of Table 9 HAP exceeds
VerDate 11
10,000 ppmw at any flowrate. The process. Specifically, you must 94 m3 (25,000 gal) storing material that proposed control requirements are to demonstrate that the production- has a vapor pressure of 0.7 kPa (0.1 convey the wastewater streams through indexed consumption of HAP has psia). controlled sewers using vapor decreased by at least 65 percent from a For wastewater at existing sources, suppression techniques to treatment 3-year average baseline set no earlier the proposed NESHAP would require where the Table 9 HAP are removed or than the 1994 through 1996 calendar that wastewater containing a total destroyed, thereby reducing Table 9 years. The production-indexed organic Table 9 HAP (40 CFR part 63, HAP emissions. At new sources, the consumption factor is expressed as the subpart G) concentration of 4,000 ppmw proposed conveyance and control mass of HAP consumed divided by the or greater be conveyed in controlled requirements are identical to those for mass of product produced. The sewers and treated to remove or destroy existing sources, but the applicability numerator in the factor is the total organic HAP. The compliance triggers on individual streams are more consumption of the HAP, which procedures cross referenced from part stringent. In addition to controlling describes all the different areas where it 63 allow for offsite control of streams that meet the thresholds for can be consumed, either through losses wastewaters provided the offsite source existing sources, control would also be to the environment, consumption in the submit to EPA written certification that required for streams containing HAP process as a reactant, or otherwise the transferee will manage and treat any listed on Table 8 of 40 CFR part 63, destroyed. affected wastewater or residual in subpart G (Table 8 HAP), if the Cleaning is considered part of the accordance with the requirements of the concentration exceeds 10 ppmw and the miscellaneous organic chemical proposed NESHAP. For new sources, wastewater stream flowrate is greater manufacturing process. Therefore, the applicability triggers for control than 0.02 lpm. cleaning fluids are considered to be would be more stringent, affecting all For transfer operations, we are process fluids, and you would be streams with Table 9 HAP proposing to require the HON level of subject to the same process vent, storage concentrations greater than or equal to control for transfer racks that load tank, equipment leak, and wastewater 2,000 ppmw. greater than 0.65 million liters per year provisions when using cleaning fluids We also note that the definition of (l/yr) (0.17 million gallons per year (gal/ as when using other process fluids. wastewater for the Miscellaneous yr)) of liquid products that contain Coating Manufacturing source category 2. Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing organic HAP with a partial pressure of (proposed subpart HHHHH) differs from Source Category 10.3 kPa (1.5 psia). Each transfer rack the definition of wastewater for that meets these thresholds would be The proposed standards for coating proposed subpart FFFF. This definition required to be controlled to reduce manufacturing cover vents from process includes HAP-containing water, raw emissions of total organic HAP by 98 vessels, storage tanks, wastewater, material, intermediate, product, by- percent by weight or more, or to have transfer operations, equipment leaks, product, co-product, or waste material displaced vapors returned to the process and ancillary heat exchange operations. that exits equipment in a process. This or originating container. For sources The proposed standards require both definition is being proposed to capture such as maintenance wastewater and stationary and portable process vessels waste solvent that may be generated in heat exchanger systems, we are with capacities greater than or equal to a process and sent to a recovery proposing to require a plan for 0.94 m3 (250 gal) to be equipped with operation. In these cases, the material minimizing emissions and a monthly covers. Additionally, organic HAP exiting the process equipment would be leak detection program, respectively, as emissions from stationary vessels at considered an affected wastewater was done in the HON. existing sources are required to be stream if it met the HAP concentration For equipment leaks, we are reduced by at least 75 percent by weight limits and therefore would be required proposing to require implementation of from an uncontrolled baseline, in to be managed as such. We think that the leak detection and repair (LDAR) addition to the requirement for covers. the wastewater standards are program that is contained in 40 CFR Stationary and portable vessels at new appropriate for these streams part 63, subpart UU. This LDAR sources would be required to be considering that their characteristics program is also identical to the program equipped with covers and to reduce reflect wastes sent offsite for in the proposed Consolidated Air Rule organic HAP emissions by at least 95 destruction. (63 FR 57748, October 28, 1998). This percent by weight. Alternatively, for Proposed standards for transfer LDAR program achieves the same both new and existing sources, you may operations would require 75 percent reductions as the HON LDAR program, use a condenser operated at specified control of HAP emissions from product but contains options for more directed temperature limits. loading to tank trucks and railcars if the monitoring of components that have The proposed standards for affected amount of material transferred contains been identified to leak, thereby reducing storage tanks at both existing and new at least 11.4 million l/yr (3.0 million the monitoring burden relative to that of sources would require either organic gal/yr) of HAP, and the material has a the HON LDAR program. HAP emissions reductions of 90 percent HAP partial pressure greater than or The proposed subpart FFFF also by weight or more, or the use of floating equal to 10.3 kPa (1.5 psia). Acceptable includes a pollution-prevention roofs or vapor balancing. For existing control strategies also include routing alternative for existing sources that sources, affected storage tanks are those displaced vapors back to the process, or meets the control level of the MACT that have capacities greater than or the use of condensers operated below floor and that you may implement in equal to 75 m3 (20,000 gal) and store specified temperature limits. lieu of the emission limitations and material with a vapor pressure of 13.1 As with the standards for work practice standards described kPa (1.9 psia). For new sources, affected miscellaneous organic chemical above. The pollution-prevention storage tanks are those with capacities manufacturing, we are proposing to alternative provides a way for facilities equal to or greater than 75 m3 (20,000 require the LDAR program contained in to comply with MACT by reducing gal) but less than 94 m3 (25,000 gal) and 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU for control overall consumption of HAP in their storing material that has a vapor of equipment leaks. For maintenance processes; therefore, it is not applicable pressure of 10.3 kPa (1.5 psia) or greater, wastewater and heat exchanger systems, for HAP that are generated in the and tanks with capacities greater than we are proposing to require a plan for
VerDate 11
minimizing emissions and a monthly For each continuous process vent verification of the operating parameter leak detection program, respectively, as with a TRE less than or equal to 2.6, is required, as is provided in the was done in the HON. compliance with the percent reduction Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP. Cleaning operations are considered emission limitation must be verified To demonstrate compliance with work part of the miscellaneous coating through measurement (testing). practice standards, such as the requirement to maintain floating roofs, manufacturing operations (like mixing). 2. Storage Tanks, Transfer Operations, inspection of equipment serves as the Therefore, cleaning fluids are and Wastewater considered to be process fluids, and the monitoring demonstration and is For demonstrating compliance with requirements for process vessels, storage required only on a periodic (yearly) various requirements, the proposed tanks, equipment leaks, and wastewater basis. NESHAP allow you to either conduct systems that apply to other process performance tests or document G. What Are the Notification, operations also apply to cleaning compliance using engineering Recordkeeping, and Reporting operations. calculations. The initial compliance Requirements? E. What Are the Testing and Initial demonstration procedures reference 40 If you are subject to the proposed Compliance Requirements? CFR part 63, subpart SS, for storage NESHAP, you would be required to tanks complying using control devices fulfill all reporting requirements 1. Process Vents and transfer operations, subpart WW for outlined in the General Provisions to The proposed subpart FFFF would storage tanks complying using floating part 63 (40 CFR part 63, subpart A). The require calculation of uncontrolled roofs, and subpart G for wastewater sections of subpart A that apply to the emissions as a first step in sources. proposed NESHAP are designated in Table 21 of the proposed subpart FFFF demonstrating compliance with the 98 3. Equipment Leaks percent or 95 percent reduction and Table 19 of the proposed subpart requirement for batch process vents. If To document compliance with the HHHHH. In addition, we have included you choose to control vents using the LDAR provisions, the proposed recordkeeping and reporting alternative standard or using specified NESHAP require you to demonstrate requirements that are specific to these combustion devices, this initial that an LDAR program meeting the proposed NESHAP. For example, you calculation of uncontrolled emissions is requirements of the Generic MACT in are required to submit a precompliance not required. For continuous process subpart UU of 40 CFR part 63 is in use. report if you choose to comply using an vents, the proposed subpart FFFF would F. What Are Continuous Compliance alternative monitoring approach, use an require calculation of the TRE index Provisions? engineering assessment to demonstrate values using the procedures contained compliance, or comply using a control The proposed NESHAP require in the HON for continuous process device handling less than 1 ton per year monitoring to determine whether you vents. of HAP emissions. Other notifications are in compliance with emission that are required by other MACT For stationary process vessels in the limitations on an ongoing basis. This standards, such as the Initial Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing monitoring is done either by Notification and the Notification of source category, you have the option of continuously measuring HAP emissions Compliance Status (NOCS), are also achieving a specified condenser exit gas reductions or by continuously required by these proposed NESHAP temperature (based on vapor pressure) measuring a site-specific operational and are identified in § 63.2540 of the in lieu of calculating uncontrolled parameter, the value of which you proposed subpart FFFF and § 63.8070 of emissions as the first step in would establish during the initial the proposed subpart HHHHH. demonstrating the 75 percent reduction compliance demonstration. The The Initial Notification is required for existing sources or 95 percent operating parameter is defined as the within 120 days of the effective date of reduction for new and reconstructed minimum or maximum value the NESHAP. The report, which is very sources. established for a control device or brief, serves to alert appropriate To verify that the required reductions process parameter that, if achieved on a agencies (State agencies and EPA have been achieved, you must either test daily basis by itself or in combination Regional Offices) of the existence of or use calculation methodologies, with one or more other operating your affected source and puts them on depending on the emission stream parameter values, determines whether notice for future compliance actions. characteristics, control device, and the you are complying with the applicable The NOCS, which is due on the type of process vent. Initial compliance emission limits. These parameters are compliance date of the NESHAP, is a demonstration provisions for batch required to be monitored at 15-minute comprehensive report that describes the vents in Miscellaneous Organic intervals throughout the operation of the affected source and the strategy being Chemical Manufacturing sources and control device. used to comply. The NOCS is also an stationary process vessels at Continuous, or 15-minute monitoring, important aspect of the title V Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing is not required for all sources. For permitting strategy for sources subject to sources reference the Pharmaceuticals emission sources not equipped with subpart FFFF, which is discussed in Production NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, control devices or falling below section II.H of this preamble. subpart GGG). Therefore, process vents applicability trigger levels, such as the control devices handling greater than 4,540 kg/yr (10,000 lb/yr) emission limit H. How Will the Proposed Subpart FFFF 9.1 Mg/yr (10 tons/yr) of HAP must be for the sum of batch vents within a Be Incorporated Into Title V Permits? tested, while engineering assessments process below which no control is Title V requires operating permits to are allowed for control devices with required, you must monitor the number assure compliance with all applicable lower loads and for condensers. of batches to demonstrate that you requirements at a source, including the Performance test provisions in both continuously fall below the yearly proposed subpart FFFF where it applies. source categories consider worst-case emission limit. For control devices that Most existing sources that will become emissions for devices controlling do not control more than 1 ton per year subject to the proposed subpart FFFF process vents. of HAP emissions, only a daily upon promulgation will already be
VerDate 11
operating under title V operating another, to record in an operating log at industry contends that thermal permits (e.g., because they are major the facility a record of the current destruction technology cannot safely sources of HAP or because they are scenario under which the source is treat these emission streams. The subject to some other section 112 operating. By minimizing the need to industry has indicated that process standard). reopen the permit, the part 70 condensers are used to recover HAP Under section 502(b)(9) of the CAA, if alternative operating scenarios may be a solvents in production processes and a Federal standard like the proposed particularly useful permit strategy. therefore condensation may be a viable subpart FFFF is promulgated when 3 or control technology for many sources. more years remain on a major source’s III. Rationale for Selecting Proposed We recognize that incineration is not a title V permit term, the permit will need Emission Limitations and Work viable control option. Therefore, we to be reopened in order to assure Practice Standards have decided to solicit comments on compliance with the proposed subpart A. How Did We Select the Source whether process vents generated in the FFFF. Such a reopening must be Categories? production of explosives, commonly completed not later than 18 months referred to as ‘‘energetics,’’ should be As noted in section I.C of this after promulgation of the proposed treated as a separate class of emission preamble, we are creating two new subpart FFFF (40 CFR 70.7(f)(1)(i)). streams subject to a lesser degree of source categories from the combination If fewer than 3 years remain on a title control corresponding to that achievable of existing source categories. These two V permit term, a permitting authority’s using condensers (or other controls). We source categories are Miscellaneous program may reflect the option not to are also soliciting comments on whether Organic Chemicals Manufacturing and require revisions to the permit to the condenser outlet gas temperature incorporate the NESHAP. Subpart FFFF Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing. defaults that are being proposed for The Miscellaneous Organic Chemicals would be added to the source’s title V coatings manufacturing would be Manufacturing source category will permit at the next permit renewal, but appropriate for this industry, and we are cover emission sources from 22 of course in the meantime, the source soliciting comments on what the previously listed source categories, as must fully comply with the proposed definition of ‘‘energetics’’ should be. subpart FFFF outside the title V permit. well as some emission sources that are Note that this discussion does not The CAA permits State programs to not specifically covered by other MACT extend to other emission sources in the require revisions to the permit to standards. For example, the HON does explosives industry, such as storage incorporate the NESHAP when fewer not regulate emissions from batch tanks, wastewater, transfer operations, than 3 years remain on a major source’s process vents. Therefore, the and equipment leaks. These emission permit term, however, so any sources Miscellaneous Organic Chemicals points will be regulated in the same with fewer than 3 years remaining on Manufacturing source category will manner as for other processes in the their permits upon the promulgation of cover these emission sources. In Miscellaneous Organic Chemicals the proposed subpart FFFF, should specifying SIC codes, we also include Manufacturing source category. consult their State permitting program SIC code 283 to include the production The Miscellaneous Coating regulations to determine whether of any materials not already covered by Manufacturing source category is much revision to their permits is necessary to the Pharmaceuticals Production narrower in applicability than the incorporate the NESHAP. NESHAP. Miscellaneous Organic Chemicals The Miscellaneous Organic Chemical In the proposed subpart FFFF, we Manufacturing source category. Process Manufacturing source category is specifically exempt by-product emission sources are vessels used to mix similar to the Pharmaceuticals ammonium sulfate manufacturing and transfer materials used to make Production source category in that both facilities at caprolactum plants and their coatings. Coatings include paints, inks, use nondedicated, multipurpose respective operations provided that the adhesives, and sealants and are equipment that may be configured in ammonium sulfate slurry entering the generally described under SIC codes 285 numerous ways to accommodate ammonium sulfate manufacturing and 289, although the NESHAP also different batch processes. In addition, operation is documented to contain 50 apply to the manufacture of any both the proposed subpart FFFF and the ppmw or less HAP and 10 ppmw or less coatings that do not fall under these SIC Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP benzene. We are providing this codes. However, other operations within (40 CFR part 63, subpart GGG) have exemption because these streams are the SIC Code 285 (SIC 2851 (NAICS process-based emission limitations for considered treated wastewater, and the 32551)—paints, varnishes, lacquers, batch processes. Therefore, when a ammonium sulfate production is an enamels, and allied products) and SIC permitting authority incorporates the inorganic chemical manufacturing Code 289 (SIC 2891 (NAICS 32552)— proposed subpart FFFF into a title V process. adhesives and sealants) that involve permit, the miscellaneous organic We also reviewed information chemical reactions are covered by the chemical manufacturing sources, like submitted by the explosives Miscellaneous Organic Chemical pharmaceuticals production sources, manufacturing industry that requested Manufacturing source category; for may wish to consider requesting that the us to develop a separate subcategory for example, the manufacture of a latex permit set forth terms and conditions for explosives manufacturers. The industry resin in a chemical reaction prior to its reasonably anticipated operating group indicated that the proposed use as a raw material to manufacture a scenarios. The part 70 regulations control requirements for batch process paint would be covered by the provide for this opportunity to allow vents could place severe and unsafe Miscellaneous Organic Chemical sources to account for operating restrictions on explosives and Manufacturing standards. scenarios that the source owner or propellant manufacturing sources operator reasonably anticipates over the because existing control technologies, B. How Did We Select the Affected course of the permit term, without need especially those technologies that can Source? for permit revisions (40 CFR 70.6(a)(9)). achieve 98 percent control, are unsafe. Most industrial plants consist of The permit would require the source, Because the possibility exists that vents numerous pieces or groups of contemporaneously with making a from these processes may contain equipment that emit HAP and that may change from one operating scenario to residual explosive materials, the be viewed as emission ‘‘sources.’’
VerDate 11
Therefore, we use the term ‘‘affected an available control technology, we use the 1997 ICR. We summed batch vents source’’ to designate equipment within the median. to calculate the mass of emissions, on an a particular kind of plant chosen as the uncontrolled basis, for each process as 1. How Did We Determine the MACT ‘‘source’’ covered by the proposed reported in the ICR responses. We then Floors for the Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP. For today’s proposed sorted the processes based on control Chemicals Manufacturing Source Miscellaneous Organic Chemical efficiency and uncontrolled HAP Category? Manufacturing NESHAP, we are emissions, ranking all processes defining the affected source as the The MACT floors for the controlled in order of increasing collection of MCPU and associated Miscellaneous Organic Chemicals uncontrolled emissions. The practical equipment, such as heat exchange Manufacturing source category were limit for control efficiency that would systems, wastewater conveyance and developed using data that were be achievable by devices in this treatment systems, and transfer collected from facilities during 1997 and industry is 98 percent. Since greater operations within a plant site that is a from existing available data located in than 12 percent of processes were major source. The MCPU definition EPA and State databases. Clean Air Act controlled to 98 percent, processes with within the affected source definition section 114 information collection the lowest uncontrolled emissions are also includes specific emission sources requests (ICR) were sent to 194 facilities best performing. The resulting database that are exempt from other MACT in the spring of 1997. The facilities contained 731 processes at 144 standards, such as batch vents from the which received the ICR were identified facilities. The number of processes HON chemical manufacturing process from EPA’s 1993 toxic release inventory making up the best 12 percent was 88. units. (TRI) database which included We determined that the median We are proposing to define the information on facilities in SIC codes performance level represented the affected source for the Miscellaneous 282, 284, 286, 287, 289, or 386. central tendency of the top processes Coating Manufacturing source category Information on continuous processes since HAP emission values for the top as the miscellaneous coating came from emissions and permit performing facilities represented a manufacturing operations, or the databases from the following States: skewed distribution over a large range. collection of equipment necessary to Texas, Louisiana, North Carolina, The median process had 4,480 kg/yr formulate coatings, including inks, Illinois, Missouri, California, and New (9,860 lb/yr) of uncontrolled HAP paints, sealants, and adhesives at a plant Jersey. Components of the MACT floor emissions. Based on this process, the site that is a major source. The affected were calculated separately for process MACT floor was set at 98 percent for source includes equipment such as heat vents, storage tanks, wastewater, processes with uncontrolled emissions exchange systems, wastewater transfer operations, and equipment of 4,540 kg/yr (10,000 lb/yr). conveyance and treatment systems, and leaks consistent with the ‘‘plank’’ For the new source MACT floor for transfer operations. methodology developed in the HON (57 batch process vents, we identified the Within each affected source, we FR 62627, December 31, 1992) and are batch process representing the best identified the following five types of discussed below. controlled similar source to have HAP emission points: process vents, a. Process Vents. For process vents, uncontrolled HAP emissions of storage tanks, transfer operations, we reviewed information on both batch approximately 1,360 kg/yr (3,000 lb/yr). equipment leaks, and wastewater. process vents and continuous process It is controlled with a thermal vents. To be consistent with formats in C. How Did We Determine the Basis and incinerator. Therefore, we selected the previous MACT standards, we grouped new source MACT floor to be 98 percent Level of the Proposed Standards for data for batch vents according to all Existing and New Sources? control for all processes with vents within a process. The floor for uncontrolled HAP emissions greater According to the CAA, the MACT batch vents was determined for the than or equal to 1,360 kg/yr (3,000 lb/ floor for existing sources is defined as process, similar to the Pharmaceuticals yr). ‘‘the average emission limitation Production NESHAP. For continuous The MACT floor for continuous achieved by the best performing 12 process vents, we evaluated data on a process vents was determined in a percent of sources (for which the single vent-by-vent basis, as was done in manner similar to what was done in the Administrator has emissions the HON. We chose the Pharmaceuticals development of the HON. We used TRE information).’’ We interpreted the term Production NESHAP as the model for values for individual process vents as a ‘‘average’’ in 59 FR 29196 as a measure the format of the batch vent standard in measure of the level of control. The TRE of the ‘‘central tendency of a data set.’’ the proposed subpart FFFF because it calculation uses inputs such as stream The central tendency may be works well for multipurpose equipment, flow rate and HAP concentration to represented by the arithmetic mean, fits well into the definition of operating produce an index value. Streams have median, or some other measure that is scenario, and works best for pollution high TRE values primarily because of reasonable. The MACT floors for the prevention. For continuous vents, we low HAP concentration. As a starting proposed NESHAP are based on the modeled the standard formats on the point, we used existing data that had central tendency for each emission HON because the continuous vents in been collected from State agency permit source type, using available data. In this source category are not expected to files. This database includes 240 vent some cases, we use the arithmetic mean differ significantly in characteristics streams from 61 processes for which to identify the floor control level and in from those covered by the HON, and TRE values could be calculated. We other cases, we use the median. other regulations such as the new source calculated TRE values using information Generally, we prefer to use the performance standards (NSPS) in 40 on the stream characteristics including arithmetic mean if sufficient data points CFR part 60, subparts NNN, III, RRR, flowrate, volatile organic compounds exist and if the resulting performance and DDD, which all require control (VOC) content, and HAP content. We level corresponds to an available control based on characterization using a TRE then identified all streams that were technology. However, if data are index on individual process vents. controlled to 98 percent or better. From insufficient to determine an arithmetic To evaluate the MACT floor for batch the TRE values and the control mean or if the result does not yield a process vents, we started with the efficiencies, we identified a threshold performance level that corresponds to database generated from responses to TRE value for each facility below which
VerDate 11
all streams were controlled. Facilities pressure materials in the source colocation rationale for both wastewater with the highest TRE threshold values category represents the best controlled new source MACT floor and the MACT are considered the best performing source. The MACT floor for new sources floors for existing and new source facilities. There are 44 facilities in the consists of floating roof technology or 95 transfer operations is further discussed floor analysis, but only 17 with percent control of all tanks with a in the next section. thresholds (the remainder of the capacity greater than or equal to 38 m3 d. Transfer Operations. Standards for facilities did not control their stream that store material with a HAP partial loading operations regulate the transfer with the lowest TRE). Since TRE values pressure of 0.1 psia, based on the of materials containing HAP. Although for the top performing facilities facility that applied controls to all tanks the products of miscellaneous organic represent an even distribution over a storing materials with a vapor pressure chemical manufacturing sources are not limited value range, it was determined at or above 0.087 psia (rounded to 0.1 expected to contain HAP, generally, it is that the average TRE value best psia). possible that products will be represented the central tendency. The c. Wastewater. For wastewater transferred in solutions of HAP. average TRE threshold for the top 12 streams, we also set the MACT floor Therefore, there is a need to establish percent of the facilities is 2.6. Therefore, using data collected from the industry. requirements for loading operations for the MACT floor at existing sources is 98 After excluding all but Table 9 HAP, the the source category. In our data percent control for all continuous database contains 363 streams at 60 gathering effort, we did not collect process vents with a TRE less than or facilities that have Table 9 HAP information on transfer operations. equal to 2.6. The TRE threshold for each concentrations of at least 1,000 ppmw. Therefore, we established the floors and facility was also used to determine the A total of 184 of these streams at 44 regulatory alternatives based on existing best performing facility. That facility is facilities meet the HON cutoffs (i.e., available data. controlling all continuous process vents streams of any flowrate that contain at We decided to base the transfer with a TRE of 5.0 or less at a level of least 10,000 ppmw of Table 9 HAP requirements for the proposed NESHAP 98 percent. Therefore, this is the MACT compounds, and streams with a flowrate on the transfer requirements contained floor for new sources. of at least 10 lpm that contain at least in the HON. The rationale for this b. Storage Tanks. In developing the 1,000 ppmw of Table 9 HAP decision is based on the fact that the MACT floor for storage tanks, we again compounds). Because more than 12 Miscellaneous Organic Chemicals used the CAA section 114 information percent of the streams that meet the Manufacturing source category is database. Approximately 16 percent of cutoff are controlled to the level of the closely related to the HON source storage tanks are reported to be HON, we therefore concluded that the category in equipment, emission equipped with a floating roof or a MACT floor consists of the HON level sources, and operations; and we believe control device achieving a HAP of control and the HON cutoffs. a floor exists from colocation of reduction efficiency of 95 percent or In establishing the new source MACT miscellaneous organic chemical more. As recognized in several NESHAP floor for wastewater, we concluded that manufacturing sources at HON facilities. and NSPS, floating roofs are equivalent the HON new source MACT floor also Many facilities with HON applicability to 95 percent control. To determine the applies to the Miscellaneous Organic also contain processes which will be appropriate vapor pressure threshold for Chemical Manufacturing source regulated by the Miscellaneous Organic the MACT floor level of performance, category. It is not possible to identify at Chemical Manufacturing NESHAP. we identified a partial pressure least one stream in the database that Additionally, there are circumstances threshold at each facility above which meets HON new source applicability where applicability to these proposed all tanks with a capacity greater than or levels of 0.02 lpm and 10 ppmw Table standards will overlap with the HON; equal to 38 m3 (10,000 gal) at the facility 8 HAP because we did not ask for data for example, the Miscellaneous Organic were controlled to the MACT floor level. on wastewater streams with less than Chemical Manufacturing NESHAP will The top 12 percent of the 128 facilities 1,000 ppmw Table 9 HAP. However, cover vents from batch unit operations in the tanks database correspond to the based on our knowledge of the that are part of HON chemical top 14 facilities. The average threshold miscellaneous organic chemical manufacturing process units (CMPU), value for the top 12 percent of facilities manufacturing industry, we have therefore products from HON and is a HAP partial pressure of 1 psia concluded that the wastewater miscellaneous organic chemical (rounded up from 0.88 psia). The conveyance and treatment systems used manufacturing sources may be loaded at average, rather than the median, was to convey and control HON-affected the same rack. chosen because the average value best wastewaters also convey and control Based on a review of facilities in represented the different HAP stored, affected wastewaters in this source Texas and Louisiana, we found that and thus represented the central category; therefore, a floor exists based approximately 60 percent of facilities tendency of the data set. on the colocation of HON and containing processes subject to the The new source MACT floor for miscellaneous organic chemical Miscellaneous Organic Chemical storage tanks was determined to be manufacturing affected sources. The Manufacturing NESHAP also contain floating roof technology or 95 percent new source floor should be no less processes subject to the HON. Assuming control since this level of control stringent than the MACT level of control that these States are representative and represents the best level of control in for new HON sources. This is also the that the colocation assumption is valid, the source category. As with the existing most stringent requirement contained in then the MACT floor for transfer source MACT floor, applicability cutoffs any other NESHAP, including the operations is based on the requirements for the new source MACT floor are Benzene Waste Operations NESHAP (40 of the HON, which is 98 percent control established based on the smallest tanks CFR part 61, subpart FF), and we would for loading racks with a throughput storing material with the lowest partial expect that a similar colocation greater than or equal to 0.65 million pressures since the emission potential of argument could be made regarding liters per year (0.17 million gallons per tanks generally decreases with capacity overlap of these requirements for year) at a rack-weighted HAP partial and vapor pressure of stored material. wastewater conveyance and control pressure greater than or equal to 10.3 Therefore, the facility controlling the with affected miscellaneous organic kPa (1.5 psia). In selecting this floor, we smallest tanks with the lowest vapor chemical manufacturing sources. The also stress that the selection of the same
VerDate 11
requirements will streamline the vessels) are equipped with covers, but c. Wastewater. In selecting MACT for compliance process for those colocated only 3 percent of portable vessels are wastewater, we did not follow the same MON processes since only one set of reportedly equipped with any type of convention as previous analyses for requirements will apply for transfer control device. Therefore, the MACT other NESHAP that assumed that the operations. floor was determined to be covers only. total quantity of generated wastewater, e. Equipment Leaks. The MACT floor For stationary vessels, we determined in addition to HAP concentration, level of performance for equipment the MACT floor to be the emission would determine treatment options. The leaks is an LDAR program for reduction achieved by the use of a fixed use of both flowrate and concentration equipment components. We estimate or removable cover that vents to a to identify streams for control is based that the HON LDAR program will control device. As with portable tanks, on the assumption that the cost and reduce HAP emissions by 63 to 75 most (approximately 98 percent) of the effectiveness of controls depend on both percent for continuous chemical stationary process vessels are equipped the concentration of HAP in the processes and 70 to 73 percent for batch with a cover. Another 8 percent of these wastewater and the quantity of chemical processes. We determined that vessels were also reported to be wastewater generated. This is a several LDAR programs implemented by controlled with an add-on device. The reasonable assumption for facilities that Texas and Louisiana are roughly top 12 percent of 4,628 stationary treat wastes on site, such as facilities equivalent to the HON LDAR program vessels correspond to 555 tanks. Of that steam strip wastewater onsite. when applied to continuous chemical these, 368 vessels were reported to be However, for small quantity generators processes. equipped with both a cover and an add- such as the coating manufacturing Approximately 33 percent of facilities on control device. The average control facilities, the need for treatment is with continuous and batch chemical efficiency of these control devices is 60 driven by the characteristics of the processes were reported to implement percent (rounded up from 57 percent). wastewater, not the flow rate. If they some type of structured LDAR program During the data analysis, we determined cannot discharge to a publicly owned for equipment components. The top that the average performance level did treatment works because of their performing 12 percent of facilities were represent the central tendency of the top wastewater characteristics, they determined by rank ordering all facilities, as control device efficiencies typically drum their wastewater and facilities by the LDAR program and represented a fairly even distribution. send it offsite for treatment. As a result, overall effectiveness in descending Therefore, we set the MACT floor for the unit cost of treatment (i.e., dollars order. The top 12 percent of the 229 stationary vessels to be 60 percent per megagram of HAP reduced) is facilities in the database correspond to control, as achieved by a cover and directly related to the characteristics of 28 facilities. We found that 30 facilities closed vent to a control device the wastewater (e.g., the HAP implement an LDAR program that achieving 60 percent control. concentration), not the flow rate. reduces emissions equivalent to the b. Storage Tanks. According to the Because the total quantity of HON program. Therefore, we set the ICR survey data, only 18 of the 453 wastewater generated is not significant floor at the HON LDAR program. storage tanks in the database were in determining the unit cost of Because we wanted to maintain equipped with control devices. treatment, we propose to set the MACT consistency with other Federal rules, we Therefore, because we did not identify floor for this industry segment based are referencing the requirements of 40 any means by which sources are only on HAP concentration and not CFR part 63, subpart UU. Implementing currently reducing emissions that is flowrate. Based on the data from the subpart UU achieves the same level of sufficiently widespread to constitute a industry, the MACT floor for existing control as implementing the HON MACT floor, we are not establishing a sources would be set based on a subpart H program. However, the MACT floor for storage tanks at existing concentration of 4,000 ppmw, subpart UU program significantly sources in the Miscellaneous Coating representing the median concentration reduces the burden associated with Manufacturing source category. of controlled streams from the industry, monitoring valves and connectors For new sources, the MACT floor while the MACT floor for new sources without increasing emissions. consists of 90 percent control for storage would be set based on a concentration tanks with a capacity ≥94 m3 (≥25,000 of 2,000 ppmw, which corresponds to 2. How Did We Determine the MACT gal) that store a material with a HAP the lowest HAP concentration that is Floors for the Miscellaneous Coating partial pressure ≥0.7 kPa (≥0.1 psia) and controlled. These requirements are Manufacturing Source Category? 90 percent control for tanks with a based on the practices of nine facilities a. Process Vessels. In developing the capacity <75 m3 (<20,000 gal) and <94 that reported information regarding MACT floor for this source category, we m3 (<25,000 gal) that store material with wastewater on ten streams. Five of the made a distinction between portable a HAP partial pressure ≥10.3 kPa (≥1.5 ten wastewater streams were reported as and stationary process tanks. This psia). Applicability cutoffs are being controlled, and all were distinction was made because of the established based on the smallest tanks controlled by being drummed and feasibility of controlling each type of storing material with the lowest partial incinerated because they were also vessel and observed industry practices pressures. This floor is based on the RCRA wastes. Thus, the control level with respect to each type of vessel. practices of one facility that has a 94 m3 was considered to be equivalent to that Stationary tanks tend to be larger in (25,000 gal) tank storing 100 percent required by the HON. capacity and are more easily adaptable xylene, which has a partial pressure of d. Transfer Operations. In the data to add-on control devices. In contrast, 0.76 kPa (0.11 psia), and a 20,000 gal gathering effort for this project, no data portable tanks do not lend themselves to tank storing 100 percent methyl ethyl were requested regarding transfer add-on control as easily. ketone, which has a partial pressure of operations. Therefore, we relied on The MACT floor level of performance 10.3 kPa (1.5 psia) (assuming a other available information to set the for portable process vessels is the temperature of 20°C for both tanks). MACT floors. In the absence of data emission reduction achieved by the use These tanks are the best performing specific for individual coating of a fixed or removable cover. Based on tanks because they are all controlled to manufacturers, we reviewed several industry survey results, approximately the best level of control in the source State rules to determine the minimum 92 percent of portable vessels (2,783 category (i.e., 90 percent). level of control that would apply to
VerDate 11
transfer operations at facilities in those determining what is achievable. These be controlled. Therefore, we selected a States. At a minimum, those rules options are discussed below. vapor pressure cutoff halfway between require 90 percent control of operations a. Miscellaneous Organic Chemicals the MACT floor applicability cutoff and where greater than 75 m3/day (20,000 Manufacturing Source Category. For zero. gal/day), which equates to 27.6 million existing sources, we identified options For wastewater, we developed a 1/yr (7.3 million gal/yr), of VOC having beyond the MACT floor for process beyond-the-floor option that changed vapor pressures of 10.3 kPa (1.5 psia) or vents, storage tanks, and wastewater one of the two sets of applicability more are transferred. These emission points. We did not develop criteria relative to the MACT floor. This requirements are typically applied to more stringent options than the floor for option has flowrate and concentration bulk loading into transport vessels such equipment leaks or transfer operations. applicability cutoffs of 1 lpm and 500 as tank trucks and railcars. For other For equipment leaks, the HON LDAR ppmw (the MACT floor is 10 lpm and containers, such as totes and drums, program is the most stringent program 1,000 ppmw). We developed an option those rules typically do not apply. available, and, therefore, there were no based on these applicability criteria to Transfer operations at coating above-the-floor options to consider. For be consistent with the applicability manufacturing facilities result from the transfer operations, we did not consider cutoffs provided in the Wastewater loading of transport vessels as well as a beyond-the-floor option because we NSPS (40 CFR part 63, subpart YYY). other containers. However, because we did not have industry-specific data The beyond-the-floor option also are not aware of any existing rules that indicating the existence of any above- includes the same applicability cutoffs apply to the loading of these containers, the-floor option and because of the high of 10,000 ppmw at any flow rate as for we are not establishing a MACT floor for level of control (98 percent) required to the MACT floor. existing transfer operations at coating meet the MACT floor. We do not believe For new sources, we did not develop manufacturing facilities. there are any beyond-the-floor options beyond-the-floor options for process for which the cost would be reasonable. vents, transfer operations, and storage For new sources we conducted a For process vents, storage tanks, and tanks because the new source floors are telephone survey of facilities identified wastewater, the required performance already more stringent than either the in the database to have high HAP levels (e.g., 98 percent control for floor or a beyond-the-floor option for throughputs based on the ICR responses process vents) are the same as for the existing sources for which costs were for storage tanks. We were unable to MACT floor. However, the applicability reasonable. For equipment leaks, we did identify any facilities that control criteria for the beyond-the-floor options not develop a beyond-the-floor emissions from bulk loading operations. are more stringent, requiring the regulatory alternative because the Because we did not identify any means installation of controls on a larger group subpart H program is already the most by which facilities currently are of affected sources. stringent program. For wastewater, we controlling emissions from such For batch process vents, the beyond- developed a beyond-the-floor option operations, we are not establishing a the-floor regulatory alternative is the that combines the same performance MACT floor for new sources in the control of all batch vents within a level as the floor with the most stringent Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing process with uncontrolled emissions of applicability cutoffs of both the new source category. 2,270 kg/yr (5,000 lb/yr) (the MACT source floor and the beyond-the-floor e. Equipment Leaks. We determined floor requires control of all batch vents option for existing sources. Thus, the that the MACT floor for equipment within each process with uncontrolled applicability cutoffs for this option components is a monthly sensory LDAR emissions of 4,540 kg/yr (10,000 lb/yr)). consist of 10,000 ppmw of Table 9 HAP program equivalent to the Bulk Gasoline The 2,270 kg/yr value was selected for at any flow rate, 500 ppmw of Table 9 Terminal NESHAP. We based this the alternative because it represents the HAP at flow rates greater than 1 lpm, determination on survey data from the midpoint between the MACT floor value and 10 ppmw of Table 8 HAP at flow industry that showed that the top and no cutoff. A cutoff is necessary rates greater than 0.02 lpm. performing 12 percent, which consisted because the required performance level b. Miscellaneous Coating of the best 15 of 127 facilities in the is high (98 percent) and some allowance Manufacturing Source Category. We database, reported monthly sensory for less cost effective or difficult to developed beyond-the-floor options, or LDAR programs that were considered control vents should be available. regulatory alternatives, for all five types equivalent to the Bulk Gasoline For continuous process vents, our of emission points at existing sources Terminal NESHAP. Fourteen of the 15 regulatory alternative applicability level and for equipment leaks and transfer facilities used monthly sensory LDAR is a TRE of 5.0 (the MACT floor TRE is operations at new sources. These programs, while only one facility used 2.6). This level also coincides with the options are described below. We did not a Method 21 monitoring-based LDAR new source MACT floor and is an develop beyond-the-floor options for program. We did not consider the one indication that the level is technically process vessels, storage tanks, and facility representative of the industry. feasible to achieve since at least one wastewater emission points at new Therefore, we also determined the new facility in the industry is currently sources because the new source floors source MACT floor to be a monthly controlling a stream(s) with this TRE. are already more stringent than either sensory program. For storage tanks, the beyond-the- the floor or a beyond-the-floor option for floor regulatory alternative vapor 3. How Did We Consider Beyond-the- existing sources for which costs were pressure applicability is greater than or Floor Technology for the Source reasonable. equal to 3.4 kPa (0.5 psia), as opposed For stationary process vessels, we Categories? to the MACT floor vapor pressure evaluated regulatory alternatives The CAA states that MACT must be applicability of greater than or equal to beyond-the-floor based on a higher level the maximum degree of reduction in 6.9 kPa (1.0 psia). The capacity of control, 75 percent reduction, rather emissions that is achievable for sources applicability remains at 38 m3 (10,000 than the 60 percent reduction in the source category and shall be no gal), the size of a small storage tank. An established in the MACT floor. For less stringent than the MACT floor. applicability cutoff in terms of vapor portable process vessels, we evaluated Therefore, we also evaluate options pressure is reasonable so that the same alternative as for stationary more stringent than the MACT floor in nonvolatile materials are not required to vessels. We evaluated the 75 percent
VerDate 11
control level based on our knowledge of 4. How Did We Select the Standards? achieved by the above-the-floor option the predominant HAP in the industry We selected the proposed standards is 145 Mg/yr, and the incremental cost and the emission stream characteristics for both source categories based on our is $15,000/Mg of HAP controlled. The from process vessels. We believe that evaluation of the floors and regulatory incremental electricity consumption to the 75 percent reduction is achievable alternatives discussed above. When operate exhaust gas fans is 5.1 million with the use of condensers, and this evaluating the more stringent options, kwh/yr (an average increase of 135,000 alternative represents a cost effective we consider the costs, nonair quality kwh/yr for an estimated 38 facilities and environmentally sound strategy that health and environmental impacts, and with additional vents subject to control results in lower secondary impacts than energy requirements that accompany the under the above-the-floor option). The other strategies such as incineration. expected emissions reductions. This incremental steam consumption for For storage tanks, we evaluated two rationale is discussed below. steam-assist flares is 6.0 million lb/yr regulatory alternatives, both with a a. Miscellaneous Organic Chemicals (about 160,000 lb/yr/facility). The performance level of 90 percent (or the Manufacturing Source Category. The incremental fuel energy for natural gas use of an internal floating roof or proposed standards for equipment leaks (to operate incinerators and flares and to external floating roof), which is and transfer operations at both new and generate steam) and coal to generate the consistent with the highest performance existing sources, and the standards for electricity is about 340 billion Btu/yr level at an existing source. We selected (about 9.0 billion Btu/yr/facility). Total process vents and storage tanks at new a partial pressure cutoff of 1.9 psia and CO, NO , and SO emissions from the sources, are based on the MACT floor X 2 a tank capacity of 75 m3 (20,000 gal) for combustion of these fuels would because no beyond-the-floor option was one option because these are common increase by about 66 Mg/yr. There developed. When a beyond-the-floor cutoffs used in many other NESHAP. would be no wastewater or solid waste option was developed (i.e., for process We also developed a second regulatory impacts. We concluded that the total vents and storage tanks at existing alternative with a lower capacity cutoff impacts of the above-the-floor option sources and wastewater at both new and of 38 m3 (10,000 gal) and the same would be unreasonable compared to the existing sources), we evaluated the partial pressure cutoff of 13.1 kPa (1.9 HAP emissions reductions achieved. incremental impacts of going beyond psia). Therefore, the proposed standard for For wastewater existing sources, the the MACT floor. batch process vents at existing sources For continuous process vents at beyond-the-floor option includes the is based on the MACT floor. same suppression and treatment existing sources, we concluded that the We reached a similar conclusion for requirements as the MACT floor, but the total impacts of the above-the-floor storage tanks at existing sources. For applicability cutoff was reduced from option would be unreasonable in light such storage tanks, the incremental HAP 4,000 ppmw to 2,000 ppmw. This lower of the HAP emission reductions reduction achieved by the above-the- concentration corresponds with the achieved. Specifically, the incremental floor option is 30 Mg/yr, and the lowest concentration in a controlled HAP reduction achieved by the above- incremental cost is $19,000/Mg of HAP wastewater stream at an existing facility the-floor option is 50 Mg/yr, and the controlled. The incremental electricity in the source category, and it is one of incremental cost is $61,000/Mg of HAP and fuel consumption rates for storage the lowest concentrations in any controlled. The incremental electricity tanks controlled with condensers at wastewater stream in the source consumption to operate exhaust gas fans existing sources are 15,000 kwh/yr and category. is 3.5 million kwh/yr (an average 145 million Btu/yr, respectively (about For transfer operations, we developed increase of 58,000 kwh/yr for an 1,500 kwh/yr/tank and 14.5 million Btu/ a beyond-the-floor option for both estimated 60 facilities with additional yr/tank, respectively); there would be no existing and new sources that requires vents subject to control under the above- environmental impacts or energy at least 75 percent control of HAP the-floor option). The incremental steam requirements for other storage tanks emissions from bulk loading of products consumption for steam-assist flares is 45 controlled with floating roofs. The total with a HAP vapor pressure greater than million lb/yr (about 750,000 lb/yr/ CO, NOX, and SO2 emissions from fuel or equal to 10.3 kPa (1.5 psia) and a facility). The incremental fuel energy for combustion would increase by only throughput greater than or equal to 11.4 natural gas (to operate incinerators and about 0.1 Mg/yr. We concluded that the million 1/yr (3.0 million gal/yr). flares and to generate steam) and coal to total impacts of the above-the-floor Emissions from bulk loading exhibit the generate the electricity is about 500 option would be unreasonable in light same characteristics as emissions from billion Btu/yr (about 8.3 billion Btu/yr/ of the HAP emissions reductions the transfer of materials in process facility). Total carbon monoxide (CO), achieved. Therefore, the proposed vessels (i.e., they result from nitrogen oxides (NOX), and sulfur standard for storage tanks at existing displacement of gases during filling and dioxide (SO2) emissions from the sources is based on the MACT floor. are assumed to be saturated emission combustion of these fuels would Finally, we concluded that the total streams that can be effectively increase by about 66 Mg/yr. There impacts of the above-the-floor for controlled using condensers). The 75 would be no wastewater or solid waste wastewater at existing sources would be percent control requirement is impacts. We concluded that the total unreasonable compared to the HAP achievable using condensers on these impacts of the above-the-floor option emissions reductions achieved. For streams. Therefore, we developed this would be unreasonable compared to the wastewater, the incremental HAP regulatory alternative to be consistent HAP emissions reductions achieved. reduction for the above-the-floor option with the regulatory alternative for Therefore, the proposed standard for is 400 Mg/yr, and the incremental cost stationary process vessels so that the continuous process vents at existing is about $15,000/Mg of HAP controlled. facility could use the same control for sources is based on the MACT floor. Additional wastewater streams at 24 both types of emission points. For batch process vents at existing existing facilities would be subject to For equipment leaks, the beyond-the- sources, we also concluded that the total the treatment requirements under the floor option for both new and existing impacts of the above-the-floor option above-the-floor option. The incremental sources is the HON LDAR program. This would be unreasonable in light of the electricity and steam consumption rates program is the most stringent program HAP emissions reductions achieved. to comply with these requirements, per in practice. The incremental HAP reduction facility, are about 47,000 kwh/yr and 8.3
VerDate 11
million lb/yr, respectively. Incremental stationary process vessels, we found percent because, as described above, we fuel consumption to generate the that going from the cover plus a 60 did not develop a more stringent option. electricity and steam is about 13 billion percent control device to the cover plus For storage tanks at existing sources, Btu/yr/facility. Total CO, NOX, and SO2 a 75 percent control device reduces we found the impacts of the first above- emissions from the fuel combustion HAP emissions by nearly 1,700 Mg/yr the-floor option, which requires control would increase by 33 Mg/yr. We and reduces annual costs by $80/Mg of of tanks greater than or equal to 75 m3 concluded that the total impacts for the HAP controlled. Assuming the control (20,000 gal) storing material with a above-the-floor option for existing levels for both the MACT floor and the vapor pressure greater than or equal to sources would be unreasonable. above-the-floor option are achieved 13.1 kPa (1.9 psia), to be reasonable Therefore, the proposed standard for using condensers, incremental compared to the HAP emissions wastewater at existing sources is based electricity consumption is about 2.7 reductions achieved. This option on the MACT floor. million kwh/yr (an average increase of reduces emissions by 2.5 Mg/yr at an For wastewater at new sources, the approximately 31,000 kwh/yr per incremental cost of $2,700 to $4,900 per differences between the above-the-floor Mg of HAP controlled, depending on the facility). To generate this electricity, fuel option and the MACT floor are the same characteristics of the tanks. In addition, consumption (coal) is estimated to as for existing sources. Therefore, we because the above-the-floor option can increase by 26.6 billion Btu/yr, and total also concluded that the incremental be achieved using floating roofs, there impacts of the above-the-floor option for CO, NOX, and SO2 emissions are are no non-air quality environmental new sources would be unreasonable, estimated to increase by less than 23 impacts or energy requirements. and the proposed standard for Mg/yr. There would be no wastewater or However, we found the second option, wastewater at new sources is based on solid waste impacts. Thus, we selected which would have required control of the MACT floor. the regulatory alternative as the all tanks having a capacity of at least 38 The proposed standards apply to proposed standard for stationary vessels m3 at the same vapor pressure cleaning as well as actual production at existing sources. The proposed applicability cutoff, has incremental steps because we understand that vessel standard for stationary vessels at new costs of more than $17,000/Mg of HAP cleaning is integral to the process. This sources is based on the MACT floor, controlled. There would also be is consistent with operations in other which consists of a cover and an add- increased non-HAP environmental industries with batch processes such as on control device that reduces HAP impacts and energy requirements to pharmaceuticals production. We are emissions by at least 95 percent operate condensers to control emissions soliciting comments on cleaning because, as described above, we did not from the tanks with capacities between procedures, emissions from cleaning, develop a more stringent option. 38 m3 and 75 m3; we did not quantify and any additional costs of controlling For portable process vessels at these impacts. Therefore, we selected emissions from cleaning as part of the existing sources we concluded that the the option that requires control of tanks process. total impacts of the above-the floor with capacities greater than or equal to b. Miscellaneous Coating option were unreasonable in light of the 75 m3 storing material with a vapor Manufacturing Source Category. For the HAP emissions reductions achieved. pressure greater than or equal to 1.9 psia Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing Specifically, going from the MACT floor as the proposed standard for storage source category, we decided to propose (a cover) to a cover plus a control device tanks at existing sources. By contrast, the regulatory alternatives identified as achieving 75 percent reduction reduces the proposed standard for storage tanks above-the-floor for stationary process HAP emissions by about 400 Mg/yr. at new sources is based on the MACT vessels at existing sources, storage tanks Assuming the control device is a floor because, as described above, we at existing sources, and transfer condenser, the incremental cost is did not develop a more stringent option. operations and equipment leaks at both For wastewater at existing sources, we approximately $21,000/Mg of HAP new and existing sources. In these cases, concluded that the impacts of the above- controlled. In addition, electricity we found that the incremental cost and the-floor regulatory option were non-air quality environmental impacts consumption to operate refrigeration unreasonable compared to the HAP and energy requirements of going above units would increase from zero at the emissions reductions achieved. For the MACT floors are acceptable. By MACT floor to more than 900,000 kwh/ wastewater at existing sources, the contrast, for stationary process vessels, yr (an average increase of about 11,000 above-the-floor regulatory option is the portable process vessels, storage tanks, kwh/yr/facility for an estimated 85 control of all streams with a total HAP and wastewater at new sources, we are facilities with portable process vessels concentration greater than 2,000 ppmw proposing standards based on the subject to additional control under the (the MACT floor was 4,000 ppmw). For MACT floor because we determined that above-the-floor option). Fuel the impacts analysis, we assumed that either the MACT floor itself is based on consumption (coal) to generate the the required treatment would be a very high level of control or the MACT electricity would increase by more than achieved using a steam stripper or by floor requirements are more stringent 9.0 billion Btu/yr; collectively, CO, sending the wastewater offsite for than existing source regulatory NOX, and SO2 emissions would increase treatment, depending on the quantity alternatives for which incremental costs by 8 Mg/yr. There would be no generated. We estimated that the above- and other impacts were not acceptable. wastewater or solid waste impacts. We the-floor option would require treatment Similarly, for wastewater at existing concluded that the total impacts for this by one additional facility and reduce sources, we are proposing standards option were unreasonable. Therefore, HAP emissions by less than 0.5 Mg/yr based on the MACT floor because we we selected the MACT floor as the at an incremental cost of more than determined that the incremental costs proposed standard for portable process $200,000/Mg of HAP controlled. In and other impacts to go above the vessels at existing sources. The addition, electricity consumption would MACT floor were not acceptable. proposed standard for portable vessels increase by about 700 kwh/yr; steam For stationary process vessels at at new sources also is based on the consumption would increase by 120,000 existing sources, we concluded that the MACT floor, which consists of a cover lb/yr; energy to generate the electricity total impacts of the above-the-floor and an add-on control device capable of and steam would increase by 180 option were reasonable. For such reducing HAP emissions by at least 95 million Btu/yr; and total CO, NOX, and
VerDate 11
SO2 emissions would increase by 0.02 The proposed standards for cleaning practice standards such as the use of Mg/yr of HAP controlled. There may operations are the same as for any other floating roofs on tanks or LDAR also be solid waste impacts if condensed process operation because controls programs for the control of equipment steam and pollutants from the steam implemented while cleaning are the leaks are proposed in these NESHAP. stripper cannot be reused. We same as for normal process operation. Standards for transfer operations concluded that the total impacts for the This is consistent with batch operations follow the same format as the standards above-the-floor option were in other industries such as for contained in the HON. The standards unreasonable. Therefore, we are pharmaceuticals production. For allow for vapor return of displaced proposing that the standard for example, the MACT floor for stationary materials back to the process or storage wastewater at existing sources be based process vessels is based on controls. container, or require a percent reduction on the MACT floor. The proposed Cleaning operations are part of the floor from uncontrolled levels achieved with standard for wastewater at new sources because we understand that if emissions the use of an add-on control device. is also based on the MACT floor (i.e, the are controlled while mixing raw Note that both proposed standards HON suppression and treatment materials, then emissions are also apply only to bulk loading into trucks requirements for all streams with a total controlled during cleaning. Therefore, or railcars. Loading into smaller vessels HAP concentration greater than 2,000 we concluded that cleaning operations (e.g., drums) that do not have a ppmw) because, as described above, we should also be included in the dedicated vent or stack would create a did not develop a more stringent option. regulatory alternative for process capture efficiency issue, and an effective For transfer operations, we found that vessels. Similarly, we based the MACT control system would likely be based on the total impacts of the above-the floor floor for wastewater treatment on induced draft capture, which would option were reasonable in light of the discharges of cleaning fluids. In fact, all result in a dilute emission stream. The HAP emissions reductions achieved. of our wastewater data from coatings control device for this type of system Specifically, the above-the-floor option manufacturing is from cleaning would be incineration, and it would not would reduce HAP emissions by about operations. We are soliciting comments be cost effective. Note that the percent 37 Mg/yr at an incremental cost of less on cleaning procedures, emissions from reduction requirement for transfer than $3,000/Mg of HAP controlled. In cleaning, and any additional costs of operations in the Miscellaneous addition, under the above-the-floor controlling emissions from cleaning as Coatings Manufacturing source category option, operation of a refrigeration unit part of the process. is the same as that for stationary process vessels (i.e., lower than the requirement at one existing facility would increase D. How Did We Select the Format of the in the HON). electricity consumption by about 2,150 Standards? Standards for wastewater also follow kwh/yr; increase energy consumption The MACT standards proposed today the formats proposed in other NESHAP by 21 million Btu/yr; and increase total are presented in numerous formats. The such as the HON. For the Miscellaneous CO, NOX, and SO2 emissions by less discussion below describes the Coating Manufacturing source category, than 0.02 Mg/yr. There would be no information we considered in selecting the applicability criteria consists only of non-air environmental impacts. We these formats. The requirements for concentration because the quantity concluded that the total impacts for the storage tanks, transfer operations, generated is of lesser importance. For above-the-floor option were reasonable. wastewater, and equipment leaks follow the Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Therefore, for both new and existing formats similar to formats used in other Manufacturing source category, we are sources, we are proposing that the regulations, enabling some streamlining proposing exactly the same language, emission limitation be based on the of requirements in cases where facilities including applicability, as was done in above-the-floor option which would must comply with multiple regulations. the HON. require at least 75 percent control of For storage tanks, the proposed The proposed LDAR standards HAP emissions from bulk loading of standards follow the same format as in reference subpart UU. That LDAR products with a HAP throughput greater other Federal regulations. The format of program allows less frequent monitoring than or equal to 11.4 million 1/yr (3.0 the standards for storage tanks is a and repair compared to the HON, but is million gal/yr) and a weighted HAP combination of work practice standard as effective as the HON because it partial pressure greater than or equal to and emission limitation—tanks which targets those components that are most 10.3 kPa (1.5 psia). require control must either be fitted likely to leak. For equipment leaks, our model with floating roofs or vented to add-on Because of the broad applicability of analysis indicates that implementing an control devices meeting a percent the Miscellaneous Organic Chemical above-the-floor option consisting of a removal requirement. These formats Manufacturing source category, the HON-equivalent LDAR program instead allow the owner operator maximum requirements contained in these of the sensory program determined to be flexibility to comply by using an add-on proposed standards for applicable the floor would reduce HAP emissions control device while maintaining a process vent emissions sources are by 360 Mg/yr at an incremental cost of simple option to comply using a work formatted so they can be applied to $2,700/Mg of HAP controlled. In practice standard. numerous types of emission sources. addition, there are no environmental Work practice standards, where Requirements for process vents are impacts or energy requirements compliance is based on operating or structured in the format of percent associated with implementing the equipment practice rather than specific reduction coupled with TRE and mass above-the-floor option. We concluded emission limitations, have been applicability limits. Requirements for that the total impacts for the above-the- recognized as effective ways to limit batch emissions sources are based on a floor option were reasonable. Therefore, HAP emissions without the burden of percent reduction from a defined we are proposing that the standard for characterization of actual HAP uncontrolled baseline over the group of equipment leaks for both existing and emissions and comparison against batch vents that are contained in a new sources be based on the HON numerical limits. Section 112(h) of the process, as was done in the LDAR program or the equivalent CAA recognizes the need for alternative Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP. program in the Generic MACT (40 CFR forms of standards, such as work For continuous process vents, the part 63, subpart UU). practice standards. Therefore, work requirements for control are based on
VerDate 11
the TRE format applied in the HON. We are, therefore, proposing the use determining what portions of processes Both formats allow for a variety of of an additional format for to control. Yet, the complementing control devices and are easily demonstrating compliance with the portion of the standard also offers a implemented over a variety of process stationary process vessel standards and percent reduction to enable all facilities vent sources. the transfer operations standards that is in the source category to comply. No The pollution-prevention standard is based on achieving preset condenser mass limit is proposed for the based on the premise that a reduction in outlet temperatures that correspond to Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing consumption of HAP can be associated ranges of material vapor pressures. This source category because we could not with a reduction in losses to air, water, option is intended to simplify the establish an acceptable emissions limit or solid waste. The required 65 percent compliance demonstration because it below which no control would be reduction in the production-indexed eliminates the demonstration of 75 required, based on the MACT floor. HAP consumption factor is equivalent percent reduction using uncontrolled We are also proposing a concentration to the overall reductions in emissions and controlled emission estimates. The standard as an alternative to a percent achieved by the emission limitations preset ranges are presented in Table 1. reduction standard for process vents and work practice standards for process and storage tanks. This alternative vents, storage tanks, wastewater, and TABLE 1.—REQUIRED CONDENSER standard was also provided in the equipment leaks. Consumption, rather EXIT GAS TEMPERATURES Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP as than emissions, is tracked because it can a means of complying with that be used as a true measure of pollution Required HAP partial pressure ranges at outlet gas NESHAP by manifolding multiple vents prevention; any decrease in 25°C, kPa (Psia) tempera- or sources to a common device. Sources consumption for the same unit of tures, °C can comply by continuously monitoring product produced must involve some the outlet concentration of the control type of increase in process efficiency, <0.7 kPa (0.1 psia) ...... 10 device using a continuous emissions ≥ including reduction of waste, increased 0.7 kPa (0.1 psia) to <17.2 monitoring system (CEMS) and ensuring product yield, and in-process recycling. kPa (2.5 psia) ...... 2 ≥17.2 kPa (2.5 psia) ...... ¥5 that the TOC concentration does not The pollution prevention alternative exceed 20 ppmv for combustion devices standard only applies to chemical These values were set by calculating, or 50 ppmv TOC for noncombustion manufacturing batch processes because on average, necessary temperatures to devices. If halogenated compounds are the batch process vent standards apply condense 75 percent of the HAP in present, you must also monitor for to all vents from the process. The streams predominantly composed of hydrogen halides and halogens and continuous process vent standard materials representing vapor pressure maintain these concentrations to below applies to single vents and is not a ranges of xylene, toluene, and methanol, 20 ppmv. process based standard. Since the TRE common materials in this industry. For for continuous vents is applied after the E. How Did We Select the Testing and wastewater streams, applicability is Initial Compliance Requirements? last recovery device, pollution based only on the wastewater prevention has already been considered constituent concentrations and follows Testing and initial compliance in the applicability of the control waste disposal practices for compliance demonstration provisions contained in requirements for continuous vents. with RCRA since the scale of operations the NESHAP are based on the For the Miscellaneous Coating generally precludes the installation and requirements contained in the HON for Manufacturing source category, process operation of wastewater treatment continuous process vents, transfer emission sources are vessels used to mix systems. sources, and wastewater sources, the and transfer materials used to make We considered other format options Generic MACT for storage tanks, and the coatings. For process vessels, the for MACT standards, including using Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP standards are a combination of work mass emission rates and outlet for batch process vents and coatings practice standard and percent reduction. concentrations. For the Miscellaneous process vessels. We believe that it is The requirement to maintain a sealed Organic Chemicals Manufacturing reasonable to use the HON and Generic and gasketed cover is a work practice source category, we concluded that a MACT compliance demonstration standard. Without such an equipment percent reduction format allows the provisions requirements for the above standard, it would be difficult to most flexibility in terms of defining the sources because the formats are demonstrate capture of displaced vapors floors and in terms of compliance with consistent with the HON and Generic into the control device. the standard. A mass rate standard MACT requirements, and because we Generally, both mixing operations and could not easily be established that expect many affected sources are transfer operations are conducted at would apply to the multitude of already familiar with the provisions, ambient temperatures. The HAP used in operations covered by the standards especially those sources that have coating manufacturing operations because of the variability in products, colocated miscellaneous organic include toluene and xylene. Based on materials, and processing conditions. chemical manufacturing process units this narrow set of operating conditions, For example, we would not want to set and HON units. The Generic MACT process vent and transfer operation a MACT floor based solely on an compliance provisions for certain emissions from this source category are emission limit that would be easily met sources (fired sources such as boilers expected to generally result from by some sources because of the nature and process heaters) also closely follow displacements; emission streams from of their operation, but could not be requirements contained in the NSPS, these displacement events are expected achieved by all sources in the category. and, therefore, owners and operators of to be saturated at ambient conditions. However, we note that the 4,540 kg/yr miscellaneous coatings facilities may The choice of control devices is (10,000 lb/yr) applicability limit for also have some familiarity for these narrower than in the previous source batch process vents is a type of mass types of sources. In the interest of category. In general, we expect that the emission limit. When coupled with the streamlining requirements for title V use of condensers will satisfy the percent reduction, the mass limit allows permits, using these existing provisions control requirements. owners and operators some flexibility in may also provide opportunities for
VerDate 11
condensing identical or similar Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP measures total non-methane organic requirements. and referenced in these proposed compounds and can be used to The testing and initial compliance NESHAP were also used in the determine percent reduction across the demonstration provisions of the Polymers and Resins NESHAP (40 CFR combustion device regardless of how Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP part 63, subparts U and JJJ). They are the combustion process affects the inlet are referenced for miscellaneous organic based on accepted vapor-liquid and outlet streams. Under certain chemical manufacturing batch process equilibrium principles and were conditions (i.e., controlled emissions vents and for miscellaneous coatings reviewed extensively during the concentrations less than 50 ppmv), stationary process vessels because that development of the Pharmaceuticals Method 25A may be used in lieu of NESHAP considers the issues associated Production NESHAP. Method 25 for determining the with the characterization and control of The worst-case testing provisions are reduction across a combustion device. batch emission sources. There are two structured to account for the most In demonstrating compliance with the important concepts contained in the challenging conditions to which a outlet concentration standard, you may Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP control device will be exposed. The use Method 18 or Method 25A. If that will also apply to the batch sources initial compliance demonstration is also Method 18 is used, the resulting in these source categories, and they are: tied to the continuous compliance concentration must be reported as the (1) The use of emission estimation demonstration in that an operating compound or compounds measured; equations to determine uncontrolled parameter is used as an indicator of the however, if Method 25A is used, the and controlled emissions, and (2) the control device’s performance over time, concentration must be reported as consideration of aggregated batch and the operating parameter is first carbon. emission sources in the development of ‘‘calibrated’’ against the control Initial compliance with the pollution- an initial compliance demonstration efficiency achieved by the device during prevention alternative would be under worst case conditions. There are the initial compliance demonstration. accomplished by documenting yearly more reliable, less costly methods to Therefore, the initial compliance quantities of HAP raw materials and characterize emissions from batch demonstration must be conducted at the products using available records, processes using accepted methodologies most challenging conditions in order to including standard purchasing and to estimate emissions from batch ensure continuous compliance under all accounting records, and periodically emission sources rather than using other conditions. However, the calculating annual rolling totals of the testing strategies that are limited in data. proposed NESHAP are structured such This is because the characteristics that that monitoring is required only for production-indexed HAP consumption drive emissions, flow and those events that are controlled for the factor for comparison with the baseline concentration, often vary independently purposes of complying with the value. The factor must be calculated of each other in batch emission events. proposed NESHAP. every 30 days for continuous processes, The use of a single data point for flow We also have provided some language and every 10 batches (up to once per and one for concentration may not be in the proposed NESHAP that clarifies month) for batch processes. representative of emissions over the appropriate methods for demonstrating F. How Did We Select the Continuous event. Conversely, the use of accepted compliance with percent reduction Compliance Requirements? emission estimation methodologies requirements and emission provides a consistent set of guidelines concentration limits on combustion Monitoring is required by the for calculating emissions and is devices. The proposed NESHAP allow proposed NESHAP to determine especially important in these proposed owners and operators to use either whether a source is in compliance on an NESHAP, since compliance rests on Method 25, 25A (under certain specific ongoing basis. We selected the demonstrating a percent reduction from conditions), or 18 to demonstrate continuous compliance requirements an uncontrolled value. The uncontrolled compliance with the HAP percent based on a combination of general value must be calculated consistently in emission reduction requirement. monitoring requirements in the General order for the NESHAP to be fairly and However, if Method 18 is used, we Provisions (subpart A) and specific consistently applied across the industry. clarify that only HAP that are present in monitoring requirements for the HON As a related issue, we have also the inlet to the device can be used to and Pharmaceuticals Production source required the same process condenser characterize the percent reduction categories. control efficiency demonstration across the device. Additionally, you 1. General Monitoring Requirements requirement as in the Pharmaceuticals must first determine which HAP are Production NESHAP for some batch present in the inlet gas stream (i.e., As specified in § 63.8(c) of the process vents in miscellaneous organic uncontrolled emissions) using process General Provisions, sources must record chemicals manufacturing sources. As in knowledge or a screening procedure. the data from their monitoring systems the Pharmaceuticals Production When using Method 25 or 25A, you at least once every 15 minutes. NESHAP, we proposed to exclude from must measure the inlet and outlet mass However, for control devices that are the demonstration requirement any emissions as carbon. determined to control less than 0.91 Mg/ process condensers followed by We provided this clarification because yr (1 ton/yr) of HAP, the proposed secondary condensers that would be when organic compounds are controlled subparts require only a daily considered air pollution control devices by combustion processes, the organic verification that the devices are and air pollution control devices pollutants emitted at the outlet of the operating as required, consistent with complying with the alternative device are not the same as those the referenced Pharmaceuticals standard. This compliance procedure entering the inlet to the device and are Production NESHAP. We are also for process condensers is being typically unknown. Method 18, which referencing limits for the minimum proposed to ensure that owners and measures specific, known compounds, amount of data that can be recorded to operators will accurately characterize will not yield accurate results unless it demonstrate compliance with the uncontrolled emissions. can be used to determine the percent proposed NESHAP, based on The emission estimation reduction of known compounds across requirements in the HON and the methodologies provided in the the device. Conversely, Method 25 Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP.
VerDate 11
Sources would be required to scrubbers, and condensers. In general, compliance status, and notification calculate either daily or block averages we selected parameters and monitoring dates. These notification requirements of their operating parameter values for provisions that are contained in the are based on requirements in §§ 63.6(h), the purpose of ensuring continuous HON and in the Pharmaceuticals 63.7(b) and (c), 63.8(e) and (f), 63.9(b), compliance. We selected the daily or Production NESHAP. The range of (f), and (h), and 63.10(d)(2) of the block averaging times referenced in the parameter limits in both NESHAP General Provisions. Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP should cover both batch and continuous 2. Reporting Requirements again following consistency with the production processes. Sources would initial compliance demonstration. monitor these operating parameters to The reporting requirements that we selected include semiannual 2. Continuous Monitoring demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission limitations and compliance reports, required in When determining appropriate operating limitations. § 63.10(e)(3), and immediate startup, monitoring options, we consider the We are also proposing monitoring shutdown, and malfunction reports, availability and feasibility of the parameters for catalytic incinerators that required in § 63.10(d)(5)(ii). If there are following strategies in a ‘‘top-down’’ are different from parameters that have no deviations from the standards during approach: (1) CEMS for the actual HAP been required to be monitored in the reporting period, then your emitted, (2) CEMS for HAP surrogates, existing NESHAP. Instead of requiring semiannual compliance report must (3) monitoring operating parameters, monitoring of the temperature include a statement to that effect. If and (4) work practice standards. In differential across the catalyst bed, we there were deviations from the evaluating the use of CEMS in these are proposing that the inlet temperature standards during the reporting period, proposed NESHAP, monitoring of into the incinerator be monitored, since then your semiannual compliance individual HAP species may not be we believe that this parameter would be report must include the information reasonable or technically feasible for a better indicator of overall incinerator listed in Table 15 of the proposed many streams. For those cases where it performance for the type of emission subpart FFFF or HHHHH. For each is feasible, CEMS meeting Performance stream characteristics we expect to find deviation where a CEMS is used to Specification 9 or 15 may be used to in these source categories. For low flow comply with the standards, your measure and report emissions as or dilute concentrations, we believe that compliance report must also include the individual HAP compounds. However, it may not always be possible to achieve information in §§ 63.8(c)(8), 63.10(c)(5) in the case of continuous monitoring of the recommended temperature through (13), and 63.10(e)(3)(vi). If there surrogates, continuous TOC monitoring differential. We are also proposing to was a startup, shutdown or malfunction is considered a viable and efficient require an annual catalyst test to verify during the reporting period, and you monitoring option and is provided in that the catalyst activity is still took actions consistent with your these proposed NESHAP. The acceptable. startup, shutdown, and malfunction alternative standard makes use of CEMS plan, then your compliance report must that meet Performance Specification 8 3. Other Monitoring include the information in that have been calibrated using the You may choose an alternative to the § 63.10(d)(5)(i). The submittal date for predominant HAP in the stream. The monitoring required by the proposed the compliance report is based on results must be reported as carbon when NESHAP. If you do, you must request information in § 63.10(e)(3)(v). compared to the 20 ppmv emission limit approval for alternative monitoring If there was a startup, shutdown, or for combustion devices or 50 ppmv according to the procedures in subpart malfunction during the reporting emission limit for noncombustion A, § 63.8, or you must request the period, and you took actions devices. To monitor hydrochloric acid approach in your precompliance report. inconsistent with your startup, emissions, you must either use a CEMS The proposed NESHAP also contain shutdown, and malfunction plan, then that meets Performance Specification monitoring for work practice standards you must submit an immediate startup, 15, or if you wish to use a CEMS for involving periodic inspections for shutdown, and malfunction report. The which we have not promulgated a equipment integrity. These monitoring report must include the actions taken Performance Specification, you must requirements include storage tank seal for the event and the information prepare a monitoring plan and submit it inspections, wastewater component provided in § 63.10(d)(5)(ii). The for approval in accordance with the surface inspections, and bypass and submittal date for the immediate procedures specified in § 63.8 of the closure device inspections and are also startup, shutdown, and malfunction General Provisions. The requirement to required by the HON and the report is based on § 63.10(d)(5)(ii). submit a monitoring plan for approval is Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP. an interim solution that is necessary 3. Recordkeeping Requirements until we promulgate applicable G. How Did We Select the Notification, The proposed NESHAP require you to Performance Specifications. Recordkeeping, and Reporting maintain a copy of each notification and Monitoring of control device Requirements? report, as well as documentation operating parameters is considered We selected the notification, supporting any initial notification or appropriate for many other emission recordkeeping, and reporting notification of compliance status, sources, and therefore, most of the other requirements based on generic according to the requirements in monitoring options provided in the requirements in the General Provisions § 63.10(b)(1)(xiv). You must also keep proposed NESHAP are based on and specific requirements for the HON the records in § 63.6(e)(3) related to parametric monitoring. and Pharmaceuticals Production startup, shutdown, and malfunction; Based on information from the source NESHAP. records of performance tests and categories, we selected operating performance evaluations, as required in parameters for the following types of 1. Notification Requirements § 63.7(g)(1); and records for each CEMS control devices that are reliable The notification requirements in the and parameter monitoring system. indicators of control device proposed NESHAP include initial The records for the CEMS would performance: thermal and catalytic notifications, notification of include the records described in incinerators, flares, carbon adsorbers, performance test, notification of § 63.10(b)(vi) through (xi); superseded
VerDate 11
versions of the performance evaluation standards in cases where other rules levels of 99 percent. These processing plan, as required in § 63.7(d)(3); and the overlap and affect the same affected vessels include removable and fixed request for alternatives to a relative sources. These provisions apply to roofs and are controlled by thermal accuracy test for CEMS, as required in sources that must comply with RCRA oxidizers, carbon adsorbers, and § 63.8(f)(6)(i). The records for the requirements at 40 CFR parts 264, 265, condensers. We determined that 95 parameter monitoring system would and 260 through 272; NSPS percent reduction represents the control include records of operating limits and requirements at part 60, subparts Kb, III, level for the best controlled source with parameter monitoring data. You must NNN, and RRR; and NESHAP consideration given to similarity of keep records of all material balances requirements at part 63, subpart H. sources and total HAP emissions and calculations documenting the Coatings manufacturers are not only control. For example, one facility percent reduction in HAP emissions potentially subject to proposed subpart reported 95 percent control device used to demonstrate compliance with HHHHH, but their products and efficiency for their portable and the standards. production operations may change as stationary vessels equipped with fixed their customers demand coatings that roofs and vented to a thermal oxidizer. H. What Is the Relationship of These will comply with the requirements of We seek comments and data on the Proposed NESHAP to Other Rules? MACT rules for source categories in the representativeness of the facilities as This section discusses the Surface Coating Processes Industry similar sources on which the proposed relationship between today’s proposed Group. Therefore, the coatings new source MACT floor is based and the NESHAP and other Federal rules manufacturers have requested that we feasibility of controlling emissions from covering facilities containing sources in coordinate the timing of the various all process vessels at a facility at the these source categories. This section surface coatings MACT rules and proposed 95 percent control level. also discusses the relationship between subpart HHHHH so that they have a We are requesting comments and data proposed subpart HHHHH and MACT chance to assess how their production on establishing the MACT floor for rules that are currently under operations may change. We recognize stationary process vessels at existing development for source categories in the this concern, and we will attempt to coating manufacturing sources. As Surface Coating Processes Industry coordinate the timing of these rules, discussed earlier in this preamble, the Group. while also considering our obligation to proposed MACT floor consists of a In today’s proposed NESHAP, we promulgate all MACT rules by May cover on the vessel and venting exhaust cross-reference pertinent existing rules 2002 so that States are not required to to a control device that reduces to maintain consistency with other develop MACT on a case-by-case basis. emissions that it receives by at least 60 Federal standards. Subparts GGG (the We are also soliciting comments on how percent. This control level represents Pharmaceuticals Production NESHAP) best to coordinate these rules. the average of the control levels for the and SS (the Generic MACT) contain best performing 12 percent of stationary I. What Types of Comments Are Being requirements for emissions sources that process vessels. We used the average, or Specifically Requested by the are similar to those found in these mean, instead of the median because the Administrator? source categories. These existing control device efficiencies represented a standards reflect the current Agency The Administrator welcomes fairly even, though wide, distribution positions that have been developed comments from interested persons on and a representative control device is through numerous rulemaking efforts. any aspect of the proposed rule, and on available at the mean. However, a large By maintaining consistency with these any statement in the preamble or number of vessels in the top 12 percent existing standards, we believe we have referenced supporting documents. The were not controlled. We are requesting reduced the burden to regulators and proposed rule was developed on the comments on whether the central industry in limiting the amount of basis of information available. The tendency of the best performing 12 material that must be understood in Administrator is specifically requesting percent of stationary process vessels order to comply. However, we are factual information that may support should be represented by the mean or interested in your specific suggestions either the approach taken or an alternate the median. The median control level for reducing the overall burden of the approach. In order to receive proper achieved for the best performing 12 NESHAP without jeopardizing their consideration, documentation or data percent of the vessels is 80 percent. The enforceability or our overall emission should be provided. This section mean, which is derived by averaging the reduction goals. requests comments on specific issues control efficiencies of both controlled Because of the broad applicability of identified during the development of and uncontrolled facilities, results in a proposed subpart FFFF, another issue the standards. level of control that is not actually with regard to the relationship of these achieved by any control device in the 1. What Comments Are We Soliciting on rules to other existing MACT rules is MACT floor dataset, although the mean MACT Floor Determinations? that applicability could appear to fit is readily achievable with a more than one source category in some We are requesting comments and data representative control device for this cases. We have, therefore, included on establishing the MACT floor for industry (i.e., condenser). The median options that allow compliance with one processing vessels in coating represents both a central tendency and rule in cases where dual MACT manufacturing at new sources. The new a level of control currently being coverage of the same affected source source MACT floor for processing achieved with add-on control. We are might occur. For example, we are vessels is 95 percent reduction of HAP soliciting comments on whether we allowing affected sources with for stationary and portable vessels that adequately characterized the MACT equipment subject to the equipment have a capacity greater than 250 gallons. floor level of control for process vessels leak standards or wastewater standards Seven facilities reported control levels at coating manufacturing facilities. contained in subpart GGG to comply for stationary processing vessels of 95 We are requesting comments and data with the proposed subpart FFFF for all percent or greater. Two of these on the basis for establishing the MACT such equipment. Lastly, we have also facilities reported control levels for floor for continuous vents in included provisions that allow portable vessels of 95 percent and miscellaneous organic chemical compliance with the provisions of these greater. Two facilities reported control manufacturing at existing sources. As
VerDate 11
discussed previously in this section, the structure, functional groups or other show there is a floor for such MACT floor for continuous process characteristics and are produced by operations, but we are evaluating the vents at existing sources is 98 percent procedures that have essentially costs to control the emissions. We seek reduction for vents meeting a TRE of identical emission sources and emission comments on costs to control emissions 2.6. The MACT floor determination was stream characteristics should be from, and an appropriate size cutoff for, based on 5 facilities which represented considered as one process. We use the such a class of manufacturers. the top 12 percent of the sources. The term ‘‘family of materials’’ to describe For both miscellaneous coating and data used to determine the MACT floor these types of materials, and the organic chemical manufacturing were collected prior to 1996, and in production of these similar products facilities, the term ‘‘cleaning operation’’ order to move forward with rule must be grouped into one ‘‘process’’ for is defined as in 40 CFR 63.1251 as development we have not continued to the purposes of complying with the ‘‘routine rinsing, washing, or boil-off of update the information. It has recently proposed subpart FFFF. In stakeholder equipment in batch operations between come to our attention that some of the meetings, industry representatives have batches.’’ As discussed in sections II.D data may have changed. Specifically, a stated that the proposed definition is and III.C, ‘‘cleaning operations’’ are plant used in the floor calculation may not clear regarding which types of considered to be part of the process in have closed down. We are soliciting products must be included in a family. which the cleaning operations occur comments on whether we adequately One suggestion was to include specific and are subject to the same characterized the MACT floor level of criteria about the product requirements as any other process step. control for continuous vents at organic characteristics, emissions, and Cleaning the exterior of equipment is chemical manufacturing facilities. processing steps that materials must not considered to be part of the We are requesting comments and data have in common in order to be part of ‘‘cleaning operations,’’ and emissions on establishing the MACT floor for a family of materials. Therefore, we are from cleaning an existing portable equipment leaks for organic chemical soliciting comments on applicable vessel are not required to be controlled manufacturing sources. We have criteria or other ways to clarify this under the proposed rule. We are information on 229 facilities indicating definition. soliciting comments on the approach. that the LDAR program implemented at According to the proposed definition Specifically, we are interested in 30 facilities is the HON LDAR program of ‘‘process vent’’ in subpart FFFF, information on cleaning procedures or a program equivalent to the HON. We emission streams that are undiluted and (e.g., whether tanks have automatic are soliciting comments on whether we uncontrolled containing less than 50 wash systems and/or have to be washed adequately characterized the MACT ppmv HAP are not considered process by hand; whether tank lids or covers floor level of control for equipment vents. We are requesting comments on have to be taken off and remain off to leaks from organic chemical the emission stream to which the 50 gain and maintain access for workers), manufacturing. ppmv criterion should be applied for venting during cleaning, and any 2. What Comments Are We Soliciting batch process vents. One approach additional costs of controlling emissions on Definitions? would be to apply it to each emission during the cleaning step as part of the We are soliciting comments on the episode (e.g., vapor displacement, process. definitions of ‘‘batch process,’’ ‘‘process purge, drying, etc.) in a process, 3. What Comments Are We Soliciting on vent,’’ ‘‘isolated intermediate,’’ and regardless of the point from which it is Standards That Overlap? ‘‘family of materials’’ in the proposed emitted. Another approach would be to subpart FFFF. The first two definitions combine all of the emission episodes Compliance options for chemical are similar to the definitions in 40 CFR that are released from a particular point manufacturing facilities subject to both part 63, subpart GGG, where a ‘‘process’’ (e.g., vapor displacement and the proposed subpart FFFF and another means all equipment which function to depressurization from a reactor vent), subpart are in 40 CFR 63.2535. produce a product or isolated and determine the average Multipurpose equipment subject to intermediate, and an ‘‘isolated concentration for the aggregated stream. standards under the proposed subpart intermediate’’ means the product of a We are interested in data for a situation FFFF may also be subject to standards process that is stored before further where one emission episode has a under another rule. Such is the case processing. Two important differences concentration above 50 ppmv, but all with equipment leaks. To minimize the between subpart GGG and the proposed other emission episodes released from compliance burden, we have included subpart FFFF are that precursors are not the same point, and the combined provisions that allow you to comply relevant in the proposed subpart FFFF stream for the emission point, have only with the equipment leak provisions and that the term ‘‘process’’ in the concentrations below 50 ppmv. We are in the proposed subpart FFFF for all proposed subpart FFFF applies to a interested in rationale supporting the equipment subject to subparts GGG and family of products. Because the batch choice of either of the presented MMM at a facility with an affected process vent standard in the proposed approaches or any other approach. source under the proposed subpart subpart FFFF applies only if the process We are requesting comments on the FFFF. We are requesting comments on vents from a single process emit 10,000 definition of ‘‘coating manufacturing’’ in other areas where different standards lbs/yr HAP; the definition of process is § 63.7985(b) of the proposed subpart may overlap, the difficulties posed by very critical to applicability HHHHH. It is not our intent to include such overlapping standards, and ways determinations. It is our intent that the end-users in the definition of to reduce the monitoring, end of a process is marked by long time manufacturers; however, several end- recordkeeping, and reporting burden of storage, storage for the purpose of users have mixing operations similar to complying with the requirements of the shipping product offsite, or storage for the activities of coating manufacturers proposed subpart and another subpart. the purpose of building inventory. A with comparable HAP emissions. To process is not an intermediate step in address these operations, we are 4. What Comments Are We Soliciting on the continuous sequence of steps to considering developing requirements for Pollution Prevention? produce a final product. In addition, we a separate class of coating We are soliciting comments on the believe that production of chemicals manufacturers who produce the coating pollution prevention alternative that vary only slightly in molecular for captive use. We do not have data to standard for miscellaneous organic
VerDate 11
chemical manufacturing in proposed proposed subpart HHHHH, such as a process vents from explosives subpart FFFF. The pollution prevention standard that applies to all processing manufacturing as a separate class of standard uses the same format as the vessels as a whole instead of each vessel process vents within the source standard in 40 CFR part 63, subpart individually. In considering category, we need to be able to clearly GGG. We especially seek information on alternatives, we will examine other define the affected processes. Because alternative measures of source reduction formats to ensure that compliance can explosives are often referred to as and pollution prevention. Note that adequately be demonstrated and ‘‘energetics,’’ we are considering using since the TRE for continuous vents is acceptable records can be maintained. this term to define the class of applied after the last recovery device, Further, we are requesting information processes, and we are soliciting pollution prevention is already on the application, effectiveness, and comments on what the definition of incorporated into the standard for cost of alternative control technologies ‘‘energetics’’ should be. continuous processes. or approaches for process vessels. No such pollution prevention As already noted, the emission 8. What Comments Are We Soliciting on alternative is currently proposed for reduction requirements in the proposed the Emission Estimates for Coating coating manufacturers; however, since subpart HHHHH represent an overall Manufacturing? the proposed rule for coating HAP control efficiency for the process We are requesting data and manufacturers does not apply to vessel. Overall control includes capture information on HAP emissions from coatings that contain less than 5 percent efficiency of emissions from the process process vessels and other process units HAP, reformulation is a possible vessels’ vented cover or lid through the at coating manufacturing facilities. The pollution prevention alternative. We are closed vent system and the recovery or AP–42 emission factor for paint soliciting information and comments on destruction efficiency of the control manufacturing is 30 pounds of volatile pollution prevention alternatives for device. We seek comments on organic compounds (VOC) per ton of coating manufacturers. demonstrating compliance for overall product. The AP–42 has an emission control of HAP from process vessels. loss factor of between 1 percent and 2 5. What Comments Are We Soliciting on The cost of the standard for stationary percent for paint mixing operations. We Testing? process vessels is based on several used 1 percent of the total HAP Subpart GGG contains testing assumptions. The representative control throughput at the facility to determine requirements that differ depending on technology is refrigerated condensation. the uncontrolled HAP emissions from the amount of HAP treated; for example, For sizing purposes, we assumed no process vessels. The industry has stated if a control device receives less than 10 more than five vessels would be filled their preference to base HAP emission tons per year HAP, then a performance simultaneously. The modeled vent calculations on the ‘‘Preferred and test is not required. We are considering stream was saturated with toluene. The Alternative Methods for Estimating Air similar requirements for miscellaneous flowrate was assumed to be 100 scfm. Emissions from Paint and Ink organic chemical manufacturing The cost of the refrigeration units were Manufacturing Facilities’’ chapter of facilities. We seek information on estimated using the model developed ‘‘Stationary Point Source Emission practicable testing procedures for batch for the Office of Air Quality Planning Inventory Development’’ prepared as processes and comments on testing and Standards. We are requesting part of the Emission Inventory provisions in subpart FFFF. comments and information on these Improvement Program (EIIP). The EIIP is assumptions and model, the a jointly sponsored effort of the State 6. What Comments Are We Soliciting on characteristics of vent streams from and Territorial Air Pollution Program MACT Standards for Process Vessels at process vessels, and the costs associated Administrators/Association of Local Air Coating Manufacturing Facilities? with the proposed standards. Pollution Control Officials (STAPPA/ The process vent standard for the ALAPCO) and EPA with the stated goal 7. What Comments Are We Soliciting on proposed subpart HHHHH applies to to provide cost-effective and reliable Explosives Production? each stationary process vessel greater inventories. The preferred method is the than 250 gallons. The standard for As discussed in section III.A., we are use of emission models, and alternative stationary vessels includes the work soliciting comments on whether process methods are the use of emission factors, practice standards for closed vent vent emissions from explosives material balances, and test data. We systems as required in 40 CFR part 63, production processes should be treated believe that emission factors and subpart SS. We are requesting as a separate class of emission streams material balances apply more to an comments and data on the types of vent subject to a lesser degree of control than entire process, emission models and test systems used on process vessels to that required for process vents from data apply most often to only a step in capture emissions from the vessels in other types of processes in the source the process and therefore may not coating manufacturing facilities with category. For example, we are account for all losses. To develop a control devices; the costs associated specifically soliciting comments on the valid estimate of uncontrolled (or with the installation of such systems; performance achievable and costs baseline) emissions using the emission and any problems encountered where associated with using condensers, models for material loading, heat-up, closed vent systems are in use, for although we are also interested in surface evaporation, and vessel example, involving worker health and information about other types of cleaning, we would need to obtain a safety issues; the ability to capture all controls. One option we are considering considerable amount of additional data. emissions from the vessel; drawing out is control based on the use of For example, we would need to know and evaporating solvents from the condensers operated at the default the typical number of vessels through coating mix in the vessel, thereby temperatures that are being proposed for which the material travels in production affecting product; and interfering with coatings manufacturing, and we are processes, the temperature of heat-up the ability to add raw material to the soliciting comments on whether these and the number or percentage of vessels. default values (or others) would be processes that have a heat-up step, the We are requesting comments on appropriate for some or all of the number of batches per year, the alternative formats for the standard that processes in the explosives production frequency of cleaning, and the volume applies to stationary process vessels in industry. If we do develop standards for of material used in cleaning. Material
VerDate 11
balances, however, by their very nature, subpart UU, which is similar to the to the total number of process vessels account for all losses. Other, more HON requirements, the owner or (or relative to the number of process resource-intensive methods, also can operator would choose to comply with vessels greater than 250 gallons) at a account for all losses. For example, the MACT floor (a sensory LDAR facility. losses from process vessels and program as required in 40 CFR part 63, We are soliciting comments and data equipment leaks from equipment subpart R) and cover all open process on both control alternatives. Whether enclosed in a building could be vessels at the affected facility (i.e., we promulgate one of the two estimated if the building exhaust including all vessels equal to or smaller alternatives or both alternatives will concentration and flows could be than 250 gallons that are not subject to depend on the comments and data we measured accurately. However, a the requirements for process vessels). receive and the results of the regulatory material balance would be easier to do, Under this alternative, we envision an impact analysis. since input data such as accounting LDAR work practice standard that 10. What Comments Are We Soliciting records and material product requires the following: (1) Performing a on Coordination of MACT Standards specifications are presumably already monthly leak inspection of all Affecting the Coating Industry? available. Therefore, we believe that an equipment in HAP service, using As discussed in III.H., we recognize emission estimating procedure that has detection methods incorporating sight, been validated with material balance that coating manufacturers may have to sound, and smell; (2) inspections that change their production processes in data will provide the most accurate are conducted during periods when the method for estimating emissions. response to demands for different process is operating; (3) initial attempts products that will comply with the Without material balance data or other at repair are made no later than 5 days more robust methods, we think that the MACT standards for surface coating after leak detection, and repairs be application. We intend to coordinate the AP–42 emission factor best estimates completed within 15 days of leak total HAP emissions and gives results promulgation of subpart HHHHH and detection, unless delay of repair is the coating application rules to the most consistent with the definition of allowed based on a demonstration that major source in section 112(a) of the extent possible, recognizing that we repair in this time period is not feasible; must promulgate all MACT standards by CAA as well as in § 63.2 of 40 CFR part and (4) all portable and stationary 63, subpart A. May 2002. Therefore, we are soliciting process vessels with a capacity less than We are soliciting comments on the comments on ways to coordinate the or equal to 250 gallons are equipped foregoing approaches, and because we timing of these rules. with a cover or lid that must be in place do not have the necessary information 11. What Comments Are We Soliciting for the coatings industry to use more at all times when the vessel contains a HAP. The covers or lids could be of on Wastewater Standards for Organic robust methods, we are requesting data Chemical Manufacturing? and information on HAP emissions from solid or flexible construction, provided process vessels and other operational they stay in place. To demonstrate Representatives of the chemical units at coating manufacturing facilities initial compliance, you would be industry have suggested that it would be as well as mass balance data to help us required to maintain a log with a list of more appropriate to regulate wastewater develop more representative emissions the equipment, a diagram, or some other streams containing mostly or entirely factors, including factors specific to this means of identifying the number of soluble HAP compounds differently industry. components and their location, and you than streams containing significant would be required to note in your amounts of partially soluble 9. What Comments Are We Soliciting on Notification of Compliance Status that compounds. They have submitted the MACT Standard for Equipment you have the required covers for the examples of wastewater streams that do Leaks at Coating Manufacturing small process vessels. To demonstrate not volatilize appreciably while in open Facilities? continuous compliance, you would be sewer lines en route to the biological Equipment leak HAP emissions from required to record in the log the identity treatment unit, and suggest that EPA coating manufacturing were estimated of the leaking components (either either establish an alternative floor of using the same emission factors used for individually or by area), the date of leak open sewer lines and biological organic chemical manufacturing detection, and the date of repair, and treatment for this subcategory of because we lacked initial leak frequency you would be required to sign the log wastewater streams, or not require data. Without industry specific leak rate book after each inspection to verify closed conveyance for such streams. data, we have no basis for using completion and accuracy. This We are soliciting comments and data anything other than the AP–42 emission alternative, including both the sensory concerning wastewater streams factor for equipment leaks. Therefore, LDAR program and the requirement to containing only soluble HAP (less than we are soliciting initial leak frequency cover vessels less than 250 gallons, 50 ppmw partially soluble HAP) that data to help us develop emission factors would go in entry 1. in Table 4 as an would be subject to the proposed rule to for equipment leaks in coating alternative work practice standard for determine whether they represent a manufacturing operations. each piece of equipment that is in separate class of wastewater (or In light of the paucity of leak data organic HAP service and is not processes from which the streams from coating manufacturing operations, described in 40 CFR 63.1019(c) through originate) as compared to HON we are considering providing an (e). We are requesting information on wastewater. The data should include alternative to compliance with the the effectiveness and cost of covering all stream flow volume, stream HAP HON-equivalent equipment leak tanks less than or equal to 250 gallons. concentrations, stream temperature at requirements in the proposed subpart Information that would assist us in the point of determination, control HHHHH. The alternative would reduce estimating the effectiveness of this option currently used to treat the emissions beyond the floor level of alternative includes types of flexible stream, and whether the lines or sewer control by requiring covers on all covers used by the industry, industry system used to convey the stream is process vessels. Instead of complying practice of using covers on small closed or open. with the leak detection and repair vessels, cost of covers, and the typical The HON requires that the sewer (LDAR) program in 40 CFR part 63 number of small process vessels relative system conveying an affected
VerDate 11
wastewater stream be closed. We microns in diameter (PM10). We plant closure expected out of the 207 understand from the industry that most estimate that these emissions would facilities affected by the proposed sources have complied with the HON by increase by about 1,270 Mg/yr (1,400 NESHAP. It should be noted that the installing steam strippers at the process ton/yr). These impacts were estimated baseline economic conditions of the so the existing sewer system did not assuming electricity is generated in facility predicted to close affect the have to be retrofitted down to the coal-fired power plants, steam is closure estimate provided by the biological treatment unit. We are produced in natural gas-fired industrial economic model, and that the facility requesting owners and operators of boilers, and natural gas is used as the predicted to close appears to have low processes covered by the proposed rule auxiliary fuel in incinerators and flares. profitability levels currently. Therefore, to comment on the installation of steam 2. What Are the Cost Impacts? it is likely that there is no adverse strippers at the process. impact expected to occur for those We are also requesting information on The cost impacts include the capital industries that produce miscellaneous unit operations that remove methanol or cost to install control devices and organic chemicals affected by the other soluble HAP from wastewater as monitoring equipment, and include the proposed NESHAP, such as soaps and efficiently as the design steam stripper annual costs involved in operating cleaners, industrial organic chemicals, in the HON. control devices and monitoring and agricultural chemicals. equipment, implementing work 12. What Comments Are We Soliciting practices, and conducting performance 4. What Are the Nonair Quality Health, on Process Change Management? tests. The annual cost impacts also Environmental, and Energy Impacts? We are soliciting information on include the cost savings generated by With the assumption that overheads process change management as it relates reducing the loss of product or solvent from steam stripping will be recoverable to title V permits. The 40 CFR part 70 in the form of emissions. The total as material or fuel, no solid waste is regulations allow the source to account capital costs for existing sources are expected to be generated from steam for operating scenarios the source owner estimated to be $122 million, and the stripping of wastewater streams. No or operator reasonably anticipates over total annual costs for existing sources solid waste is expected to be generated the source of the permit term, without are estimated to be $75 million. from controls of other emission points. need for permit revision (40 CFR We estimate that in the first 3 years We expect the overall energy demand 70.6(a)(9)). Change management strategy after the effective date of subpart FFFF (i.e., for auxiliary fuel in incinerators, is discussed in detail in the preamble to that the annual cost burden will average electricity generation, and steam the promulgated NESHAP for $3,200/yr per respondent for production) to increase by an estimated Pharmaceuticals Production (63 FR monitoring, recordkeeping, and 8.8 million gigajoules per year (GJ/yr) 50309, September 21, 1998). We are reporting requirements for an estimated (8.37 trillion British thermal units per soliciting comments on change 251 sources. Most of these costs are for year (Btu/yr)). management and especially change new and reconstructed sources that B. Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing management for owners and operators must be in compliance upon startup; complying with the proposed other costs are for existing sources to 1. What Are the Air Quality Impacts? alternative standard that limits the prepare initial notifications and plans. In the 4th year after the effective date, We estimated nationwide baseline outlet concentration of the control HAP emissions from the Miscellaneous device. existing facilities must begin to monitor and record operating parameters to Coating Manufacturing source category IV. Summary of Environmental, Energy, comply with operating limits and to be 7,800 Mg/yr (8,600 tons/yr). We and Economic Impacts prepare compliance reports, which will estimated that the proposed standards significantly increase the nationwide in subpart HHHHH will reduce HAP A. Miscellaneous Organic Chemical emissions by about 5,670 Mg/yr (6,250 Manufacturing annual burden. We expect that the actual compliance tons/yr). Because many of the HAP The basis for the estimated impacts cost impacts of the proposed NESHAP emitted by miscellaneous coating for existing sources subject to the will be less than described above manufacturing facilities are also VOC, proposed NESHAP is discussed in a because of the potential to use common the proposed NESHAP also will reduce series of memoranda in the docket. control devices, upgrade existing VOC. Combustion of fuels to generate 1. What Are the Air Quality Impacts? control devices, implement emissions averaging, or comply with the electricity and steam would increase We estimated nationwide baseline alternative standard. Because the effect secondary emissions of CO, NOX, SO2, HAP emissions from the Miscellaneous of such practices is highly site-specific and PM10. We estimate that these Organic Chemical Manufacturing source and data were unavailable to estimate emissions would increase by about 34 category to be 44,700 Mg/yr (49,300 how often the lower cost compliance Mg/yr (37 ton/yr). These impacts were tons/yr). We estimated that the practices could be utilized, we could estimated assuming electricity is proposed standards in subpart FFFF not quantify the amount by which generated in coal-fired power plants and will reduce HAP emissions by about actual compliance costs will be reduced. steam is produced in natural gas-fired 28,000 Mg/yr (31,000 tons/yr). Because industrial boilers. many of the HAP emitted by 3. What Are the Economic Impacts? miscellaneous organic chemical The economic impact analysis shows 2. What Are the Cost Impacts? manufacturing facilities are also VOC, that the expected price increase for The cost impacts include the capital the proposed NESHAP also will reduce affected output would be 0.5 percent as cost to install control devices and VOC. a result of the proposed NESHAP for monitoring equipment, and it includes Combustion of fuels in combustion- miscellaneous organic chemical the annual costs involved in operating based control devices and to generate manufacturers. The expected change in control devices and monitoring electricity and steam would increase production of affected output is a equipment, implementing work secondary emissions of CO, NOX, SO2, reduction of 0.3 percent as a result of practices, and conducting performance and particulate matter less than 10 the proposed NESHAP. There is one tests. The annual cost impacts also
VerDate 11
include the cost savings generated by 4. What Are the Nonair Quality Health, include regulations that have reducing the loss of product or solvent Environmental, and Energy Impacts? ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, in the form of emissions. The total We do not expect solid waste to be on the relationship between the national capital costs for existing sources are generated from controlling HAP government and the States, or on the estimated to be $57 million, and the emissions from miscellaneous coating distribution of power and total annual costs for existing sources manufacturing facilities. If a facility responsibilities among the various are estimated to be $16 million. elects to control wastewater using a levels of government.’’ Today’s proposed rules do not have steam stripper, we expect that We estimate that in the first 3 years federalism implications. They will not overheads from steam stripping will be after the effective date of the proposed have substantial direct effects on the recoverable as material or fuel, and that subpart HHHHH that the annual cost States, on the relationship between the no solid waste would be generated. No burden will average $3,500/yr per national government and the States, or solid waste is expected to be generated respondent for monitoring, on the distribution of power and from controls of other emission points. recordkeeping, and reporting responsibilities among the various We expect the overall energy demand requirements for an estimated 129 levels of government, as specified in (i.e., for electricity generation and steam sources. Most of these costs are for new Executive Order 13132 because State production) to increase by an estimated and reconstructed sources that must be and local governments do not own or 43,200 GJ/yr (41.0 billion Btu/yr). in compliance upon startup; other costs operate any sources that would be are for existing sources to prepare initial V. Administrative Requirements subject to the proposed NESHAP. Thus, notifications and plans. In the 4th year the requirements of section 6 of the A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory after the effective date, existing facilities Executive Order do not apply to the Planning and Review must begin to monitor and record proposed NESHAP. Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR operating parameters to comply with C. Executive Order 13175, Consultation operating limits, and they must prepare 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA must determine whether the regulatory action and Coordination with Indian Tribal compliance reports. These activities will Governments significantly increase the nationwide is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to annual burden. review by the Office of Management and Executive Order 13175, entitled Budget (OMB) and the requirements of ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with We expect that the actual compliance the Executive Order. The Executive Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR cost impacts of the proposed NESHAP Order defines ‘‘significant regulatory 67249, November 6, 2000), requires EPA will be less than described above action’’ as one that is likely to result in to develop an accountable process to because of the potential to use common a rule that may: ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by control devices, upgrade existing (1) Have an annual effect on the tribal officials in the development of control devices, implement emissions economy of $100 million or more or regulatory policies that have tribal averaging, or comply with the preset adversely affect in a material way the implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal temperature limits for condensers. economy, a sector of the economy, implications’’ are defined in the Because the effect of such practices is productivity, competition, jobs, the Executive Order to include regulations highly site-specific and data were environment, public health or safety, or that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on unavailable to estimate how often the state, local, or tribal governments or one or more Indian tribes, on the lower cost compliance practices could communities; relationship between the Federal be utilized, we could not quantify the (2) create a serious inconsistency or government and the Indian tribes, or on amount by which actual compliance otherwise interfere with an action taken the distribution of power and costs will be reduced. or planned by another agency; responsibilities between the Federal (3) materially alter the budgetary government and Indian tribes.’’ 3. What Are the Economic Impacts? impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, The proposed rules do not have tribal The economic impact analysis shows or loan programs, or the rights and implications. They will not have that the expected price increase for obligation of recipients thereof; or substantial direct effects on tribal affected output would be 0.3 percent as (4) raise novel legal or policy issues governments, on the relationship a result of the proposed NESHAP for arising out of legal mandates, the between the Federal government and miscellaneous coating manufacturers. President’s priorities, or the principles Indian tribes, or on the distribution of set forth in the Executive Order. power and responsibilities between the The expected change in production of Pursuant to the terms of Executive Federal government and Indian tribes, affected output is a reduction of 0.1 Order 12866, the EPA has submitted as specified in Executive Order 13175. percent as a result of the proposed this action to OMB for review. Changes No tribal governments own or operate NESHAP. There is one plant closure made in response to suggestions or miscellaneous organic chemical expected out of the 127 facilities recommendations from OMB will be manufacturing process units or affected by the proposed NESHAP. It documented and included in the public miscellaneous coating operations. Thus, should be noted that the baseline record. Executive Order 13175 does not apply economic conditions of the facility to these proposed rules. predicted to close affect the closure B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism estimate provided by the economic Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, D. Executive Order 13045, Protection of model, and that the facility predicted to August 10, 1999), requires EPA to Children from Environmental Health close appears to have low profitability develop an accountable process to Risks and Safety Risks levels currently. Therefore, it is likely ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, that there is no adverse impact expected State and local officials in the April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: to occur for those industries that development of regulatory policies that (1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically produce output affected by the proposed have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies significant’’ as defined under Executive NESHAP, such as paints, inks, and that have federalism implications’’ is Order 12866, and (2) concerns an adhesives. defined in the Executive Order to environmental health or safety risk that
VerDate 11
EPA has reason to believe may have a officials of affected small governments Maximum disproportionate effect on children. If to have meaningful and timely input in number of the regulatory action meets both criteria, the development of EPA regulatory employees Category NAICS codes to be EPA must evaluate the environmental proposals with significant Federal considered health or safety effects of the planned intergovernmental mandates, and a small rule on children, and explain why the informing, educating, and advising business planned regulation is preferable to other small governments on compliance with potentially effective and reasonably the regulatory requirements. Manufac- 325110, 325120 1000 feasible alternatives that EPA turing. 325193, 325199 The EPA has determined that the 325212, 325221 considered. proposed NESHAP do not contain a The EPA interprets Executive Order 325222, 325311 Federal mandate that may result in 325132, 325192 750 13045 as applying only to those expenditures of $100 million or more 325211, 325411 regulatory actions that are based on for State, local, and tribal governments, 325412, 325611 health or safety risks, such that the in the aggregate, or the private sector in 325920 analysis required under section 5–501 of any 1 year. The maximum total annual 325191, 325312 500 the Executive Order has the potential to costs of the Miscellaneous Organic 325314, 325320 influence the regulation. Today’s Chemical Manufacturing and the 325413, 325414 325510, 325520 proposed NESHAP are not subject to the Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing Executive Order because they are based 325612, 325613 NESHAP for any year have been 325620, 325910 on technology performance, not health estimated to be less than $75 million or safety risks. Furthermore, the 325991, 325992 and $16 million, respectively. Thus, 325998 proposed NESHAP have been today’s proposed NESHAP are not determined not to be ‘‘economically subject to the requirements of sections After considering the economic significant’’ as defined in Executive 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In addition, impacts of today’s proposed subparts Order 12866. EPA has determined that the proposed FFFF and HHHHH on small entities, I E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of NESHAP contain no regulatory certify that this action will not have a 1995 requirements that might significantly or significant economic impact on a Title II of the Unfunded Mandates uniquely affect small governments substantial number of small entities. Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public because they contain no requirements In accordance with the RFA, EPA Law 104–4, establishes requirements for that apply to such governments or conducted an assessment of the Federal agencies to assess the effects of impose obligations upon them. proposed standards on small businesses their regulatory actions on State, local, Therefore, today’s proposed NESHAP within the industries affected by the and tribal governments and the private are not subject to the requirements of proposed NESHAP. Based on SBA size sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, section 203 of the UMRA. definitions for the affected industries EPA generally must prepare a written F. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as and reported sales and employment data statement, including a cost-benefit Amended by the Small Business for the Miscellaneous Coating analysis, for proposed and final rules Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of Manufacturing source category, EPA with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. identified as small businesses 32 of the result in expenditures by State, local, 58 companies owning affected coating and tribal governments, in aggregate, or The RFA generally requires an agency manufacturing facilities. This by the private sector, of $100 million or to prepare a regulatory flexibility constitutes 55 percent of the affected more in any 1 year. Before promulgating analysis of any rule subject to notice businesses. Although small businesses an EPA rule for which a written and comment rulemaking requirements represent 55 percent of the companies statement is needed, section 205 of the under the Administrative Procedure Act within the source category, they are UMRA generally requires EPA to or any other statute unless the agency expected to incur 24 percent of the total identify and consider a reasonable certifies that the rule will not have a industry compliance costs of $16 number of regulatory alternatives and significant economic impact on a million. According to EPA’s economic adopt the least-costly, most cost- substantial number of small entities. assessment, there are two small firms effective, or least-burdensome Small entities include small businesses, with compliance costs equal to or alternative that achieves the objectives small organizations, and small greater than 3 percent of their sales. In of the rule. The provisions of section governmental jurisdictions. addition, there are five small firms with 205 do not apply when they are For purposes of assessing the impacts cost-to-sales ratios between 1 and 3 inconsistent with applicable law. of today’s proposed subparts FFFF and percent. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to HHHHH on small entities, small entity An economic impact analysis was adopt an alternative other than the least- is defined as: (1) A small business performed to estimate the changes in costly, most cost-effective, or least- ranging from up to 500 employees to up product price and production quantities burdensome alternative if the to 1,000 employees, depending on the for the firms affected by the proposed Administrator publishes with the final NAICS code, (2) a small governmental subpart HHHHH. The analysis shows rule an explanation why that alternative jurisdiction that is a government of a that of the 70 facilities owned by was not adopted. Before EPA establishes city, county, town, school district or affected small firms, one is expected to any regulatory requirements that may special district with a population of less shut down after the implementation of significantly or uniquely affect small than 50,000; and (3) a small the proposed NESHAP. governments, including tribal organization that is any not-for-profit The baseline economic condition of governments, it must have developed enterprise which is independently the facility predicted to close affects the under section 203 of the UMRA a small owned and operated and is not closure estimate provided by the government agency plan. The plan must dominant in its field. The table below economic model. Facilities that are provide for notifying potentially presents the threshold for small already experiencing adverse economic affected small governments, enabling businesses by NAICS code. conditions will be more severely
VerDate 11
impacted than those that are not. Our Manufacturers, the Adhesives and NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR analysis indicates that the facility Sealants Council, the American part 63, subpart A), which are predicted to close currently has low Chemical Council, and the Synthetic mandatory for all operators subject to profitability levels. Organic Chemical Manufacturers national emission standards. These As for the Miscellaneous Organic Association. These trade organizations, recordkeeping and reporting Chemical Manufacturing source which represent the majority of facilities requirements are specifically authorized category, based on SBA size definitions covered by these subparts, have by section 114 of the CAA (42 U.S.C. for the affected industries and reported represented their members at 7414). All information submitted to EPA sales and employment data, EPA stakeholder meetings throughout the pursuant to the recordkeeping and identified as small businesses 27 of the standards development process. We reporting requirements for which a 113 companies owning affected worked with the coating manufacturers claim of confidentiality is made is miscellaneous organic chemical to minimize the overlap of MACT safeguarded according to EPA’s policies manufacturing facilities. This standards and coordinate subpart set forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B. constitutes 24 percent of the affected HHHHH with MACT standards for Both proposed NESHAP would businesses. Although small businesses coating applications. We worked with require maintenance inspections of the represent 24 percent of the companies the small chemical manufacturers to control devices but would not require within the source category, they are develop a format for the process vent any notifications or reports beyond expected to incur 6 percent of the total standard that is reasonable for the those required by the General industry compliance costs of $75 production of chemicals using batch Provisions. The recordkeeping million. According to EPA’s economic processing in nondedicated equipment. requirements require only the specific assessment, there is one small firm with We provide several alternative ways to information needed to determine compliance costs equal to or greater comply with the standards to allow as compliance. than 3 percent of their sales. In addition, much flexibility as possible. Emissions The average annual monitoring, there are three small firms with cost-to- averaging and the pollution prevention reporting, and recordkeeping burden per sales ratios between 1 and 3 percent. alternative standards help those small respondent for these collections An economic impact analysis was entities that have been proactive in (averaged over the first 3 years after the performed to estimate the changes in reducing their HAP emissions and effective date of the NESHAP) is product price and production quantities usage, respectively. Another alternative estimated to be 72 labor hours per year for the firms affected by the proposed standard requires the outlet at a cost of $3,200 for proposed subpart subpart FFFF. The analysis shows that concentration of the control device to be FFFF, and 79 labor hours per year at a of the 49 facilities owned by affected less than 20 ppmv. Under this cost of $3,500 for proposed subpart small firms, one is expected to shut alternative, recordkeeping and reporting HHHHH. These estimates include one- down after the implementation of the requirements are greatly reduced. In time submissions of notifications and proposed NESHAP. addition, we have included in the precompliance reports; preparation of a It should be noted that the baseline preamble guidance for Part 70 startup, shutdown, and malfunction economic condition of the facility requirements to minimize Title V permit plan with semiannual reports for any predicted to close affects the closure modifications for owners and operators event when the procedures in the plan estimate provided by the economic that make frequent changes to their were not followed; preparation of model, i.e., facilities which are already processes. We continue to be interested semiannual compliance reports; and experiencing adverse economic in the potential impacts of the proposed recordkeeping. Total annualized capital/ conditions will be more severely NESHAP on small entities and welcome startup costs associated with the impacted than those that are not, and comments on issues related to such monitoring requirements for the 3-year that the facility predicted to close impacts. period of the ICR are estimated at appears to have low profitability levels $256,000/yr for proposed subpart FFFF currently. G. Paperwork Reduction Act and $10,000/yr for proposed subpart In summary, this action will affect 59 The information collection HHHHH. Average operation and companies, out of 171 affected requirements in the proposed NESHAP maintenance costs associated with the companies, owning coating and organic will be submitted for approval to OMB monitoring requirements for the 3-year chemical manufacturing facilities as under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 period are estimated at $92,000/yr for small businesses. Small firms will incur U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The EPA has proposed subpart FFFF and $34,000/yr approximately $8.3 million of the total prepared two ICR documents (ICR Nos. for proposed subpart HHHHH. industry compliance costs of $91 1969.01 and 1971.01), one for proposed Burden means the total time, effort, or million. A total of three small firms will subpart FFFF and the other for proposed financial resources expended by persons have compliance costs equal to or subpart HHHHH, and copies may be to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose greater than 3 percent of their sales, and obtained from Sandy Farmer by mail at or provide information to or for a eight small firms will have cost-to-sales the Office of Environmental Federal agency. This includes the time ratios between 1 and 3 percent. Two Information, Collection Strategies needed to review instructions; develop, facilities owned by affected small firms Division (2822), U.S. EPA, 1200 acquire, install, and utilize technology are expected to shut down after the Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, and systems for the purposes of implementation of this action. DC 20460, by email at collecting, validating, and verifying Although the proposed NESHAP will [email protected], or by calling information, processing and not have a significant economic impact (202) 260–2740. Copies may also be maintaining information, and disclosing on a substantial number of small downloaded off the internet at http:// and providing information; adjust the entities, EPA nonetheless has tried to www.epa.gov/icr. The information existing ways to comply with any limit the impact of the proposed requirements are not effective until previously applicable instructions and NESHAP on small entities. We have OMB approves them. requirements; train personnel to be able worked closely with the National Paint The information requirements are to respond to a collection of and Coatings Association, the National based on notification, recordkeeping, information; search data sources; Association of Printing Ink and reporting requirements in the complete and review the collection of
VerDate 11
information; and transmit or otherwise A–96–04). The search for emissions documented, and submitted with the disclose the information. monitoring procedures for measuring data report even if there is no moisture An Agency may not conduct or emissions of the HAP or surrogates condenser used or the compound is not sponsor, and a person is not required to subject to emission limitations in these considered water soluble. respond to, a collection of information NESHAP identified 19 voluntary As a result, EPA proposes to unless it displays a currently valid OMB consensus standards that appeared to incorporate by reference (IBR) ASTM control number. The OMB control have possible use in lieu of EPA numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed standard reference methods. However, 6420–99 into 40 CFR 63.14 for in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. after reviewing the available standards, application with these subparts FFFF Comments are requested on the EPA determined that 13 of the candidate and HHHHH of part 63. The EPA will Agency’s need for this information, the consensus standards would not be also cite Method 18 as a gas accuracy of the provided burden practical due to lack of equivalency, chromatography (GC) option in addition estimates, and any suggested methods documentation, and validation data. to ASTM D6420–99. This will allow the for minimizing respondent burden, The 13 standards are: ASME C00031 or continued use of other GC including through the use of automated Performance Test Code 19–10–1981, configurations. collection techniques. Send comments ASTM D3154–91 (1995), ASTM D3464– The EPA takes comment on proposed on the ICR to the Director, Collection 96, ASTM D3796–90 (1998), ASTM compliance demonstration requirements Strategies Division; U.S. EPA (2822); D5835–95, ASTM D6060–96, ASTM proposed in this proposed rulemaking 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., E337–84 (Reapproved 1996), CAN/CSA and specifically invites the public to Washington, DC 20460; and to the Z2232.2–M–86, European Norm (EN) identify potentially-applicable Office of Information and Regulatory 12619 (1999), EN 1911–1,2,3 (1998), ISO voluntary consensus standards. Affairs, Office of Management and 9096:1992, ISO 10396:1993, and ISO Budget, 725 17th St., NW., Washington, 10780:1994. Of the six remaining Commenters should also explain why DC 20503, marked ‘‘Attention: Desk candidate consensus standards, the this regulation should adopt these Officer for EPA.’’ Include the ICR following five are under development or voluntary consensus standards in lieu of number in any correspondence. Since under EPA review: ASME/BSR MFC EPA’s standards. Emission test methods OMB is required to make a decision 12M, ASME/BSR MFC 13m, ASTM and performance specifications concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 D5790–95 (1995), ISO/DIS 12039, and submitted for evaluation should be days after April 4, 2002, a comment to ISO/FDIS 14965. The EPA plans to accompanied with a basis for the OMB is best assured of having its full follow, review, and consider adopting recommendation, including method effect if OMB receives it by May 6, 2002. these candidate consensus standards validation data and the procedure used The final rule will respond to any OMB after their development and further to validate the candidate method (for or public comment on the information review by EPA is completed. other than Method 301, 40 CFR part 63, requirements contained in this proposal. One consensus standard, ASTM appendix A, was used). D6420–99, Standard Test Method for H. National Technology Transfer and Table 9 of the proposed subpart FFFF Advancement Act Determination of Gaseous Organic Compounds by Direct Interface Gas and Table 8 of the proposed subpart Section 12(d) of the National Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry HHHHH list the EPA testing methods Technology Transfer and Advancement (GC/MS), is appropriate in the cases and performance standards included in Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–113) described below for inclusion in these the proposed regulations. Most of the (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use NESHAP in addition to the currently standards have been used by States and voluntary consensus standards in their available EPA Method 18 codified at 40 industry for more than 10 years. regulatory and procurement activities CFR part 60, appendix A. Similar to Nevertheless, under § 63.7(f), the unless to do so would be inconsistent EPA’s performance based Method 18, proposal also allows any State or source with applicable law or otherwise ASTM D6420–99 is also a performance to apply to EPA for permission to use impractical. Voluntary consensus based method for measurement of an alternative method in place of any of standards are technical standards (e.g., gaseous organic compounds. However, the EPA testing methods or performance materials specifications, test methods, ASTM D6420–99 was written to support standards listed in the proposed sampling procedures, business the specific use of highly portable and NESHAP. practices) developed or adopted by one automated GC/MS. While offering or more voluntary consensus bodies. advantages over the traditional Method I. Executive Order 13211, Actions The NTTAA directs EPA to provide 18, the ASTM method does allow some Concerning Regulations That Congress, through annual reports to less stringent criteria for accepting GC/ Significantly Affect Energy Supply, OMB, with explanations when an MS results than required by Method 18. Distribution or Use agency does not use available and Therefore, ASTM D6420–99 (Docket A– applicable voluntary consensus 96–04) is a suitable alternative to These rules are not subject to standards. Method 18 where the target Executive Order 13211, (66 FR 28355, This proposed rulemaking involves compound(s) are those listed in Section May 22, 2001) because they are not technical standards. The EPA proposes 1.1 of ASTM D6420–99 (Docket citation significant regulatory actions under in this rule to use EPA Methods 1, 1A, of table); and the target concentration is Executive Order 12866. 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2G, 2F, 3, 3A, 3B, 4, 15, between 150 ppb(v) and 100 ppm(v). 18, 25, 25A, 305, 316, 320, 624, 625, For target compound(s) not listed in List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 1624, 1625, 8260, and 8270. Consistent Table 1.1 of ASTM D6420–99, but Environmental protection, with the NTTAA, the EPA conducted potentially detected by mass Administrative practice and procedure, searches to identify voluntary consensus spectrometry, the regulation specifies Air pollution control, Hazardous standards in addition to these EPA that the additional system continuing substances, Intergovernmental relations, methods. The search and review results calibration check after each run, as Reporting and recordkeeping have been documented and placed in detailed in Section 10.5.3 of the ASTM requirements. the docket for these NESHAP (Docket method, must be followed, met,
VerDate 11
Dated: February 20, 2002. 63.2510 How may I transfer wastewater to Vent Systems, and Heat Exchange Christine Todd Whitman, a treatment unit that I do not own or Systems operate? Table 15 to Subpart FFFF—Initial Administrator. Compliance With Emission Limitations For the reasons stated in the Notifications, Reports, and Records and Work Practice Standards for Transfer preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63, of 63.2515 What notifications must I submit Operations the Code of the Federal Regulations is and when? Table 16 to Subpart FFFF—Initial proposed to be amended as follows: 63.2520 What reports must I submit and Compliance With Emission Limitations when? for Halogenated Vent Streams Controlled PART 63—[AMENDED] 63.2525 What records must I keep? with a Combustion Device 63.2530 In what form and how long must I Table 17 to Subpart FFFF—Continuous 1. The authority citation for part 63 keep my records? Compliance with Emission Limitations continues to read as follows: Other Requirements and Information Table 18 to Subpart FFFF—Continuous Compliance with Operating Limits Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. 63.2535 What compliance options do I have Table 19 to Subpart FFFF—Continuous if part of my plant is subject to both this 2. Part 63 is amended by adding Compliance with Work Practice subpart and another subpart? Standards subpart FFFF to read as follows: 63.2540 What parts of the General Table 20 to Subpart FFFF—Requirements for Provisions apply to me? Subpart FFFF—National Emission Reports 63.2545 Who implements and enforces this Table 21 to Subpart FFFF—Applicability of Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants subpart? General Provisions to Subpart FFFF for Miscellaneous Organic Chemical 63.2550 What definitions apply to this Manufacturing subpart? Subpart FFFF—National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Sec. Tables to Subpart FFFF of Part 63 Table 1 to Subpart FFFF—Emission for Miscellaneous Organic Chemical What this Subpart Covers Limitations and Work Practice Standards Manufacturing 63.2430 What is the purpose of this for Continuous Process Vents What this Subpart Covers subpart? Table 2 to Subpart FFFF—Emission 63.2435 Am I subject to the requirements in Limitations and Work Practice Standards § 63.2430 What is the purpose of this this subpart? for Batch Process Vents subpart? Table 3 to Subpart FFFF—Emission 63.2440 What parts of my plant does this This subpart establishes national subpart cover? Limitations and Work Practice Standards 63.2445 When do I have to comply with for Wastewater Streams, Waste emission standards for hazardous air this subpart? Management Units, and Liquid Streams pollutants (NESHAP) for miscellaneous in Open Systems Within an MCPU organic chemical manufacturing. This Emission Limitations and Work Practice Table 4 to Subpart FFFF—Emission subpart also establishes requirements to Standards Limitations and Work Practice Standards demonstrate initial and continuous 63.2450 What emission limitations and for Storage Tanks compliance with the emission work practice standards must I meet? Table 5 to Subpart FFFF—Work Practice limitations and work practice standards. Standards for Equipment Leaks, Closed- General Compliance Requirements Vent Systems, and Heat Exchange § 63.2435 Am I subject to the requirements 63.2455 What are my general requirements Systems in this subpart? for complying with this subpart? Table 6 to Subpart FFFF—Emission (a) You are subject to the Limitations and Work Practice Standards Testing and Initial Compliance for Transfer Operations requirements in this subpart if you own Requirements Table 7 to Subpart FFFF—Emission or operate miscellaneous organic 63.2460 How do I determine whether vent Limitations for Halogenated Vent chemical manufacturing process units streams and wastewater streams meet the Streams that are Controlled with a (MCPU) that are located at, or are part applicability criteria? Combustion Device of, a major source of hazardous air 63.2465 By what date must I conduct Table 8 to Subpart FFFF—Operating Limits pollutants (HAP) emissions as defined performance tests or other initial and Work Practice Standards for Control in section 112(a) of the Clean Air Act compliance demonstrations? Devices, Recovery Devices, and (CAA). 63.2470 What performance tests, design Wastewater Treatment Units evaluations, and other procedures must Table 9 to Subpart FFFF—Requirements for (b) An MCPU includes equipment I use? Performance Tests necessary to operate a miscellaneous 63.2475 What are my monitoring device Table 10 to Subpart FFFF—Initial organic chemical manufacturing installation, operation, and maintenance Compliance With Emission Limitations process, as defined in § 63.2550, that requirements? and Work Practice Standards for satisfies all of the conditions specified 63.2480 How do I demonstrate initial Continuous Process Vents in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this compliance with the emission Table 11 to Subpart FFFF—Initial section. An MCPU also includes any limitations and work practice standards? Compliance With Emission Limitations associated storage tanks for feedstocks and Work Practice Standards for Batch and recovered solvents; equipment in Continuous Compliance Requirements Process Vents 63.2485 How do I monitor and collect data Table 12 to Subpart FFFF—Initial open systems that is used to convey or to demonstrate continuous compliance? Compliance With Emission Limitations store water having the same 63.2490 How do I demonstrate continuous and Work Practice Standards for concentration and flow characteristics compliance with the emission Wastewater Streams, Waste Management as wastewater; and components such as limitations and work practice standards? Units, and Liquid Streams in Open pumps, compressors, agitators, pressure Systems Within an MCPU Alternative Means of Compliance relief devices, sampling connection Table 13 to Subpart FFFF—Initial systems, open-ended valves or lines, 63.2495 How do I comply with the Compliance With Emission Limitations valves, connectors, and instrumentation pollution prevention standard? and Work Practice Standards for Storage 63.2500 How do I comply with emissions Tanks systems that are used to manufacture averaging? Table 14 to Subpart FFFF—Initial any material or family of materials 63.2505 How do I comply with the Compliance With Work Practice described in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through alternative standard? Standards for Equipment Leaks, Closed- (v) of this section. You must assign
VerDate 11
storage tanks to the MCPU according to such as heat exchange systems, waste means ‘‘MCPU’’ for the purposes of this the provisions contained in § 63.2440(c). water and waste management units, and subpart. (1) The material or family of materials transfer operations that are associated (h) An MCPU that is also a CMPU is described in paragraph (b)(1)(i), (ii), with manufacturing materials described under § 63.100 is reconstructed for the (iii), (iv), or (v) of this section. in § 63.2435(b)(1). purposes of this subpart if, and only if, (i) An organic chemical or chemicals (c) You must consider storage tanks to the CMPU meets the requirements for classified in SIC code 282, 283, 284, be part of the MCPU if either the input reconstruction in § 63.100(l)(2). 285, 286, 287, 289, or 386, except as to the storage tank from the (i) An affected source is existing if it provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this miscellaneous organic chemical is not new or reconstructed. section. manufacturing process (either directly (ii) An organic chemical or chemicals or through other storage tanks assigned § 63.2445 When do I have to comply with this subpart? classified in NAICS Code 3251, 3252, to the MCPU) is greater than or equal to 3253, 3254, 3255, 3256, or 3259, except the input from any other process, or the (a) If you have a new or reconstructed for NAICS Codes 325351 and 325181 output from the storage tank to the affected source, you must comply with and as provided in paragraph (c)(3) of miscellaneous organic chemical this subpart according to the this section. manufacturing process (either directly requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) and (iii) Quaternary ammonium or through other storage tanks assigned (2) of this section. compounds and ammonium sulfate to the MCPU) is greater than or equal to (1) If you startup your new or produced with caprolactam. the output to any other process. If the reconstructed affected source before the (iv) Hydrazine. greatest input to and/or output from a effective date of this subpart, then you (v) Organic solvents recovered using shared storage tank is the same for two must comply with the requirements for nondedicated solvent recovery devices. or more processes, including at least one new and reconstructed sources in this (2) It processes, uses, or produces miscellaneous organic chemical subpart no later than the effective date HAP. manufacturing process, you may assign of the subpart. (3) Except for process vents from the storage tank to any process unit that (2) If you startup your new or batch operations within a chemical has the greatest input or output. If the reconstructed affected source after the manufacturing process unit (CMPU), as use varies from year to year, then you effective date of this subpart, then you identified in § 63.100(j)(4), it is not part must base the determination on the must comply with the requirements for of an affected source under another utilization that occurred during the year new and reconstructed sources in this subpart of this part 63. For this preceding [date of publication of final subpart upon startup of your affected situation, the MCPU is the same as the rule] or, if the storage tank was not in source. CMPU as defined in § 63.100. For these operation during that year, you must (b) If you have an existing affected MCPU, you are subject only to the base the use on the expected use for the source on the effective date, you must requirements for batch process vents in first 5-year period after startup. You comply with the requirements for this subpart. must include the determination in the existing sources in this subpart no later (c) The requirements in this subpart Notification of Compliance Status than the date 3 years after the effective do not apply to the operations specified specified in § 63.2515(e). date of this subpart. If you add in paragraphs (c)(1), (2), and (3) of this (d) An affected source is a new equipment to your existing affected section. affected source if you commenced source after the effective date and before (1) Research and development construction of the affected source after the date 3 years after the effective date, facilities, as defined in section 112(c)(7) April 4, 2002, and you meet the you must comply with the requirements of the CAA. applicability criteria at the time you for existing sources in this subpart no (2) Any MCPU that manufactures commenced construction. later than the date 3 years after the ammonium sulfate as a by-product, if (e) An MCPU dedicated to effective date of this subpart for the the slurry entering the by-product manufacturing a single material (or added equipment. manufacturing process contains 50 parts concurrent production of multiple (c) If you add equipment to your per million by weight (ppmw) HAP or materials) is a new affected source if the existing affected source after the date 3 less (or 10 ppmw benzene or less). You MCPU has the potential to emit 10 tons years after the effective date, you must must retain information, data, and per year of any one HAP or 25 tons per comply with the requirements for analysis to document the HAP year of combined HAP, and you existing sources in this subpart upon concentration in the entering slurry in commenced construction of the MCPU startup of the added equipment. order to claim this exemption. (d) If you have an area source that (3) The production of coatings after April 4, 2002. increases its emissions or its potential to including, but not limited to, inks, (f) An affected source is reconstructed emit such that it becomes a major source paints, and adhesives that are if you commenced reconstruction as of HAP, you must comply with the manufactured solely by mixing and that defined in § 63.2 after April 4, 2002, requirements in paragraphs (d)(1) and are part of an affected source under except that the phrase ‘‘affected or (2) of this section. subpart HHHHH of this part 63. previously unaffected stationary source’’ in § 63.2 shall mean ‘‘affected source’’ (1) Any portion of the existing facility § 63.2440 What parts of my plant do the for the purposes of this subpart. that is a new affected source or a requirements in this subpart cover? (g) An MCPU that is a major source reconstructed source must be in (a) This subpart applies to each new, in and by itself and is dedicated to compliance with the requirements for reconstructed, or existing miscellaneous manufacturing a single material (or new and reconstructed sources in this organic chemical manufacturing concurrent production of multiple subpart upon startup. affected source. materials) is reconstructed if you (2) All other parts of the source must (b) The miscellaneous organic commenced reconstruction as defined be in compliance with the requirements chemical manufacturing affected source in § 63.2 after April 4, 2002, except that for existing sources in this subpart by is the facilitywide collection of MCPU the phrase ‘‘affected or previously the date 1 year after the date the area and associated ancillary equipment unaffected stationary source’’ in § 63.2 source becomes a major source.
VerDate 11
(e) You must meet the notification (g) As provided in § 63.6(g), you may §§ 63.2485 through 63.2530 for any of requirements in § 63.2515 according to apply to EPA for approval to use an these units. This exemption applies to the schedule in § 63.2515 and in subpart alternative to an emission limitation or units used as control devices or A of this part. Some of the notifications work practice standard in Tables 1 wastewater treatment units. must be submitted before you are through 8 of this subpart. (1) A hazardous waste incinerator that required to comply with the emission (h) Opening of a safety device, as has been issued a final permit under 40 limitations and work practice standards defined in § 63.2550, is allowed at any CFR part 270 and that complies with the in this subpart. time conditions require to avoid unsafe requirements of 40 CFR part 264, conditions. subpart O, or that has certified Emission Limitations and Work (i) The emission limitations in Table compliance with the interim status Practice Standards 4 of this subpart for control devices requirements of 40 CFR part 265, § 63.2450 What emission limitations and used to control emissions from storage subpart O; work practice standards must I meet? tanks do not apply during periods of (2) A boiler or process heater with a (a) You must meet each emission planned routine maintenance. Periods design heat input capacity of 44 limitation and work practice standard in of planned routine maintenance of each megawatts (150 million British thermal Tables 1 through 7 of this subpart that control device, during which the control units per hour) or greater; applies to you as specified in device does not meet the emission (3) A boiler or process heater into paragraphs (a)(1) through (7) of this limitation specified in Table 4 of this which the vent stream is introduced section. subpart, must not exceed 240 hours per with the primary fuel or is used as the (1) Table 1 of this subpart specifies year. primary fuel; or emission limitations and work practice General Compliance Requirements (4) A boiler or process heater burning standards for continuous process vents. hazardous waste that meets the (2) Table 2 of this subpart specifies § 63.2455 What are my general requirements in paragraph (f)(4)(i) or (ii) emission limitations and work practice requirements for complying with this of this section: standards for batch process vents. subpart? (i) The boiler or process heater has (3) Table 3 of this subpart specifies (a) You must be in compliance with been issued a final permit under 40 CFR emission limitations and work practice the emission limitations (including part 270 and complies with the standards for wastewater streams, waste operating limits) and the work practice requirements of 40 CFR part 266, management units, and liquid streams standards in this subpart at all times, subpart H; or in open systems within an MCPU. except during periods of startup, (ii) The boiler or process heater has (4) Table 4 of this subpart specifies shutdown, and malfunction. certified compliance with the interim emission limitations and work practice (b) You must always operate and status requirements of 40 CFR part 266, standards for storage tanks. maintain your affected source, including subpart H. (5) Table 5 of this subpart specifies air pollution control and monitoring (g) When this subpart requires the use work practice standards for equipment equipment, according to the provisions of a control device, you may use either leaks, closed-vent systems, and heat in § 63.6(e)(1)(i). a single control device or any (1) During the period, if any, between exchange systems. combination of control devices. (6) Table 6 of this subpart specifies the compliance date specified for your emission limitations and work practice affected source in § 63.2445 and the date Testing and Initial Compliance standards for transfer operations. upon which continuous monitoring Requirements (7) Table 7 of this subpart specifies systems have been installed and emission limitations for halogenated validated and any applicable operating § 63.2460 How do I determine whether vent streams and wastewater streams meet the vent streams that are controlled with a limits have been set, you must maintain applicability criteria? combustion device. a log detailing the operation and (b) You must determine the total maintenance of the process and (a) Determine affected continuous resource effectiveness value for each emissions control equipment. process vents. For each continuous continuous process vent using the (2) [Reserved]. process vent from an MCPU, you must procedures described in § 63.2460(a). (c) You must develop and implement determine the total resource (c) If an emission stream contains a written startup, shutdown, and effectiveness (TRE) index value as halogen atoms, you must determine malfunction plan (SSMP) according to specified in § 63.115(d), except as whether it meets the definition of a the provisions in § 63.6(e)(3). specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of halogenated stream using the (d) If you use a boiler or process this section. procedures specified in § 63.2460(b). heater to comply with an emission (1) When a TRE index value of 4.0 is (d) You must either designate a limitation, then the vent stream must be referred to in § 63.115(d), TRE index wastewater stream as an affected introduced into the flame zone of the values of 2.6 for existing sources and 5.0 wastewater stream or determine that it boiler or process heater. for new and reconstructed sources apply is an affected wastewater stream using (e) After you treat an affected for the purposes of this subpart. the procedures specified in § 63.2460(c). wastewater stream or residual removed (2) When § 63.115(d) refers to (e) You must meet each operating from an affected wastewater stream, it is ‘‘emission reductions specified in limit for control devices, recovery no longer subject to this subpart. § 63.113(a),’’ the emission limitations devices, and wastewater treatment units (f) You are not required to conduct a and work practice standards specified in in Table 8 of this subpart that applies to performance test or design evaluation Table 1 of this subpart apply for the you. when you use any of the units specified purposes of this subpart. (f) All emission limitations, operating in paragraphs (f)(1) through (4) of this (b) Determine halogenated vent limits, and work practice standards in section to meet emission limitations streams. To determine whether an Tables 1 through 8 of this subpart apply specified in § 63.2450. You also are emission stream from a process vent, to new, reconstructed, and existing exempt from the continuous waste management unit, or transfer sources, unless limited to specific compliance, recordkeeping, and operation is halogenated, you must sources within the tables. reporting requirements specified in calculate the halogen atom levels as
VerDate 11
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of specified in § 63.2445(a). You must also emissions from continuous process this section. comply with § 63.7(a)(2) for vents, you must conduct the test (1) For continuous process vents, performance tests. according to § 63.997. calculate the mass emission rate of (c) If you have an area source that (3) When you conduct a performance halogen atoms contained in the organic increases its emissions or its potential to test for a control device used to control compounds according to the procedures emit such that it becomes a major emissions from batch process vents, you in § 63.115(d)(2)(v). source, you must conduct all initial must conduct the test according to (2) For emission streams from batch compliance demonstrations required in § 63.1257(b)(8). process vents, waste management units, Tables 10 through 16 of this subpart that (4) When you conduct a performance and transfer operations, calculate the apply to you in accordance with the test for a wastewater treatment unit or concentration of each organic schedule specified in paragraphs (c)(1) control device, you must conduct the compound containing halogen atoms in and (2) of this section. test according to § 63.145. accordance with § 63.115(d)(2)(v)(A), (1) For those parts of the source that (5) You do not have to conduct a multiply each concentration by the are an existing affected source, you must performance test for any condenser, but applicable number of halogen atoms in conduct all initial compliance you must have the results of continuous the organic compound, and sum the demonstrations prior to the date 1 year direct measurement of the condenser resulting halogen atom concentrations after the area source becomes a major outlet gas temperature to be used in associated with each organic compound. source. determining concentrations as part of (c) Determine affected wastewater (2) For those parts of the source that the design evaluation specified in streams. For each wastewater stream are a new affected source or paragraph (d) of this section. that you generate, you must either reconstructed source, you must conduct (6) If you elect to use Method 18 of designate the wastewater stream as an all initial compliance demonstrations no 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, or ASTM affected wastewater stream according to later than 180 calendar days after D6420–99 (incorporated by reference as the procedures in paragraph (c)(1) of startup. You must also comply with specified in § 63.14), to measure the this section, or you must determine § 63.7(a)(2) for performance tests. percent reduction of HAP as specified in whether the wastewater stream is an (d) You must conduct a subsequent Table 9 of this subpart, you must affected wastewater stream according to performance test or compliance conduct the performance test using the the procedures in paragraph (c)(2) of demonstration equivalent to an initial procedures in paragraphs (c)(6)(i) this section. Each affected wastewater compliance demonstration within 180 through (iii) of this section. stream is subject to the requirements in days of a change in the worst-case (i) In conducting the performance test, Table 3 of this subpart. conditions. collect and analyze samples as specified (1) You may designate any wastewater in Method 18 or ASTM D6420–99. You stream to be an affected wastewater § 63.2470 What performance tests, design must collect samples simultaneously at evaluations, and other procedures must I the inlet and outlet of the combustion stream. You do not have to determine use? the concentration or flow rate for any device. If the performance test is for a designated affected wastewater stream. (a) You must conduct each combustion control device, you must (2) For wastewater streams that you performance test, design evaluation, and first determine which HAP are present do not designate as affected wastewater other procedure specified in Tables 10 in the inlet gas stream (i.e., uncontrolled streams, you must use the procedures through 16 of this subpart that applies emissions) using process knowledge or specified in § 63.144(b) and (c) to to you. the screening procedure described in establish the concentrations and flow (b) When you are required to calculate Method 18. Quantify the emissions for rates, except as specified in paragraphs uncontrolled emissions from batch the HAP present in the inlet gas stream (c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section. vents according to § 63.1257(d)(2)(i), use for both the inlet and outlet gas streams (i) The phrase ‘‘Group 1 wastewater any applicable option except you may for the combustion device. stream’’ in § 63.144 means ‘‘affected not calculate emissions from heating (ii) Calculate the concentration and wastewater stream’’ for the purposes of using Equation 13 of subpart GGG of emission rate of total organic HAP this part, or emissions from this subpart. (EHAP) in the inlet and outlet vent (ii) The phrase ‘‘Group 2 wastewater depressurization using the procedures streams using the equations in stream’’ means any wastewater stream in § 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(C)(1) through (4). §§ 63.115(c)(3)(ii) and 63.116(c)(4)(ii). that is not an affected wastewater stream (c) Requirements for performance (iii) Calculate the percent reduction in for the purposes of this subpart. tests. Each performance test must be total organic HAP using the equation in conducted according to the § 63.116(c)(4)(iii). § 63.2465 By what date must I conduct requirements in § 63.7(e)(1), except that (7) If you elect to use Method 25A of performance tests or other initial performance tests for HAP from batch 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, to compliance demonstrations? process vents must be conducted determine the percent reduction (a) If you have an existing affected according to paragraph (c)(3) of this efficiency of a vent stream controlled in source on the effective date of this section and not under normal operating a noncombusion device as specified in subpart, you must conduct all initial conditions as specified in § 63.7(e)(1). Table 9 of this subpart, you must compliance demonstrations required in Performance tests also must be conduct the performance test in Tables 10 through 16 of this subpart that conducted using the methods and accordance with paragraphs (c)(7)(i) apply to you prior to the date 3 years procedures specified in Table 9 of this through (iv) of this section. after the effective date. subpart and in paragraphs (c)(1) through (i) Calibrate the instrument on the (b) If you have a new affected source (15) of this section. predominant HAP. or a reconstructed source, you must (1) You may not conduct performance (ii) The results are acceptable if the conduct all initial compliance tests during periods of startup, response from the high level calibration demonstrations required in Tables 10 shutdown, or malfunction, as specified gas is at least 20 times the standard through 16 of this subpart that apply to in § 63.7(e)(1). deviation for the response from the zero you no later than 180 calendar days (2) When you conduct a performance calibration gas when the instrument is after the applicable compliance date test for a control device used to control zeroed on its most sensitive scale.
VerDate 11
(iii) Calculate the inlet and outlet in paragraphs (c)(10)(i) through (iii) of 316 or Method 320 (40 CFR part 63, concentrations of Total Organic this section. appendix A) to separately determine the Compound (TOC) per Section 8 of (i) Measure the total gaseous non- formaldehyde concentration. Calculate Method 25A. Calculate the emission rate methane organic (TGNMO) the total HAP or TOC emissions by of TOC (ETOC) in the inlet and outlet concentration of the inlet and outlet totaling the formaldehyde emissions vent streams using the equation in vent streams using the procedures of measured using Method 316 or 320 and § 63.116(c)(4)(ii). Method 25, except that you may use the other HAP emissions measured (iv) Calculate the percent reduction in Method 25A in lieu of Method 25 if the using Method 18 or 25/25A according to TOC using the equation in condition in either paragraph Table 9 of this subpart. § 63.116(c)(4)(iii). (c)(10)(i)(A) or (B) of this section is met. (13) If the uncontrolled or inlet gas (8) If you elect to use Method 18 of (A) The concentration at the inlet to stream to the control device contains 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, or ASTM the control system and the required carbon disulfide, you must conduct D6420–99 (incorporated by reference as level of control are such to result in emissions testing according to specified in § 63.14), to measure the exhaust TGNMO concentrations of 50 paragraphs (c)(13)(i) or (ii) of this total concentration of HAP at the outlet ppmv or less. section. of the control device, as specified in (B) Because of the high efficiency of (i) If you elect to comply with any of Table 9 of this subpart, you must the control device, the anticipated the percent reduction emission conduct the performance test using TGNMO concentration at the control limitations in Tables 1 through 6 of this procedures in paragraphs (c)(8)(i) and device exhaust is 50 ppmv or less, subpart, and carbon disulfide is the (ii) of this section. regardless of the inlet concentration. principal HAP component (i.e., greater (i) For a combustion control device, (ii) Using the TGNMO concentration than 50 percent of the HAP in the you must first determine which HAP are from Method 25 or the TOC stream by volume), then you must use present in the inlet gas stream using concentration from method 25A, Method 18 or Method 15 (40 CFR part process knowledge or the screening calculate the emission rate of TOC 60, appendix A) to measure carbon procedure described in Method 18. In (ETOC) in the inlet and outlet vent disulfide at the inlet and outlet of the control device. Use the percent conducting the performance test, streams according to paragraph (c)(7)(iii) reduction in carbon disulfide as a analyze samples collected at the outlet of this section. surrogate for the percent reduction in of the combustion control device as (iii) Calculate the percent reduction in total HAP emissions. specified in Method 18 or ASTM TOC according to paragraph (c)(7)(iv) of (ii) If you elect to comply with any of D6420–99 for the HAP compounds this section. (11) You must use Method 26 in the outlet TOC concentration limitations present at the inlet of the control device. appendix A to part 60 to measure in Table 1 through 6 of this subpart, and (ii) The total HAP concentration hydrogen halide and halogen the uncontrolled or inlet gas stream to (C ) is the sum of the concentrations HAP concentrations as specified in Table 9 of the control device contains greater than of the individual HAP components and this subpart, and you must conduct the 10 percent (volume concentration) must be computed for each run using performance test using the procedures carbon disulfide, you must use Method the equation in § 63.115(c)(3)(ii). in paragraphs (c)(11)(i) and (ii) of this 18 or Method 15 to separately determine (9) If you elect to use Method 25A of section. the carbon disulfide concentration. 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, to measure (i) Use a minimum sampling time of Calculate the total HAP or TOC the TOC concentration of the outlet vent 1 hour. emissions by totaling the formaldehyde stream as specified in Table 9 of this (ii) Use Method 26A in lieu of Method emissions measured using Method 18 or subpart, you must conduct the 26 when measuring emissions at the 15 and the other HAP emissions performance test using the procedures outlet of a scrubber where the potential measured using Method 18 or 25/25A in paragraphs (c)(9)(i) through (iii) of for mist carryover exists. according to Table 9 of this subpart. this section. (12) If the uncontrolled or inlet gas (14) You may use ASTM D6420–99 (i) Calibrate the instrument on the stream to the control device contains (incorporated by reference as specified predominant HAP. formaldehyde, you must conduct in § 63.14) in lieu of Method 18 of 40 (ii) Conduct the performance test in emissions testing according to CFR part 60, appendix A, under the accordance with paragraphs (c)(9)(ii)(A) paragraph (c)(12)(i) or (ii) of this section. conditions specified in paragraphs and (B) of this section as follows: (i) If you elect to comply with any of (c)(14)(i) through (iii) of this section. (A) The results are acceptable if the the percent reduction emission (i) If the target compound(s) is listed response from the high level calibration limitations in Tables 1 through 6, and in Section 1.1 of ASTM D6420–99 and gas is at least 20 times the standard formaldehyde is the principal HAP the target concentration is between 150 deviation for the response from the zero component (i.e., greater than 50 percent parts per billion by volume and 100 calibration gas when the instrument is of the HAP in the stream by volume), ppmv. zeroed on its most sensitive scale; and than you must use method 316 or (ii) If the target compound(s) is not (B) The span value of the analyzer Method 320 (40 CFR part 63, appendix listed in Section 1.1 of ASTM D6420– must be less than 100 parts per million A) to measure formaldehyde at the inlet 99, but is potentially detected by mass by volume (ppmv). and outlet of the control device. Use the spectrometry, an additional system (iii) Report the results as carbon, percent reduction in formaldehyde as a continuing calibration check after each calculated according to equation 25A–1 surrogate for the percent reduction in run, as detailed in Section 10.5.3 of of Method 25A. total HAP emissions. ASTM D6420–99, must be followed, (10) If you elect to use Method 25 of (ii) If you elect to comply with any of met, documented, and submitted with 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, to the outlet TOC concentration limitations the performance test report even if you determine the percent reduction of TOC in Tables 1 through 6 of this subpart, do not use a moisture condenser or the of a vent stream controlled in a and the uncontrolled or inlet gas stream compound is not considered soluble. combustion device as specified in Table to the control device contains greater (iii) If a minimum of one sample/ 9 of this subpart, you must conduct the than 10 percent (volume concentration) analysis cycle is completed at least performance test using the procedures formaldehyde, you must use Method every 15 minutes.
VerDate 11
(15) Three test runs are required for (e)(3)(i) of this section and, if applicable, you will measure and record at least each performance test. paragraph (e)(3)(ii) of this section. once per averaging period (i.e., daily or (d) Design evaluation. When you (i) The additional operating limits block, as defined in § 63.2475(a)(5) or conduct a design evaluation, you must may be based on the results of the (b)(3)) to verify that the control device follow the procedures in § 63.1257(a)(1). performance test and supplementary is operating properly. You may elect to The design evaluation must also include information such as engineering measure the same parameter(s) that is the value(s) and basis for the operating assessments and manufacturer’s required for control devices that control limit(s) to be monitored as specified in recommendations. These limits may be inlet HAP emissions equal to or greater Table 8 of this subpart. established for conditions as unique as than 1 ton/yr as specified in Table 8 of (e) Establishing operating limits individual emission episodes for a batch this subpart. If the parameter will not be during performance tests. During the process. You must provide rationale in measured continuously, you must period of each performance test the precompliance report for the request approval of your proposed conducted according to paragraphs specific level for each operating limit, procedure in the precompliance report. (c)(2) and (3) of this section for any type including any data and calculations You must identify the operating limit(s) of control device listed in Table 8 of this used to develop the limit and a and the measurement frequency, and subpart, you must collect operating description of why the limit indicates you must provide rationale to support parameter monitoring system data, proper operation of the control device. how these measurements demonstrate average the operating parameter data The procedures provided in this the control device is operating properly. over the test period, determine the paragraph (e)(3)(i) have not been approved by the Administrator and (g) Outlet concentration correction for operating limit(s) to be monitored for determination of the operating limit supplemental gases. (1) Combustion that control device, and set limits using these procedures is subject to Devices. If you use a combustion device according to paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of review and approval by the to comply with an outlet concentration this section. You may also elect to Administrator. emission limitation, you must correct establish additional operating limit(s) (ii) If you elect to establish separate the actual TOC, organic HAP, and for conditions other than those under monitoring levels for different emission hydrogen halide and halogen which the performance test was episodes within a batch process, you concentrations to 3 percent oxygen if conducted as specified in paragraph must maintain records in your daily you add supplemental gases, as defined (e)(3) of this section. schedule or log of processes indicating in § 63.2550, to the vent stream or (1) If the operating limit to be each point at which you change from manifold. You must use the integrated established is a maximum, it must be one operating limit to another, even if sampling and analysis procedures of based on the average of the values for the duration of the monitoring for an Method 3A or 3B of 40 CFR part 60, each of the three test runs. operating limit is less than 15 minutes. appendix A, to determine the actual (2) If the operating limit to be You must maintain a daily schedule or oxygen concentration (%02d). You must established is a minimum, it must be log of processes according to take samples during the same time that based on the average of the values for § 63.2525(a)(5). you take the TOC or total organic HAP each of the three test runs. (f) Periodic verification. For a control or hydrogen halides and halogen (3) If you elect to establish additional device with total inlet HAP emissions samples. Use Equation 1 of this section operating limits, you must comply with less than 1 ton/yr, you must establish an to correct the concentration to 3 percent the requirements specified in paragraph operating limit(s) for a parameter(s) that oxygen (Cc):
17.9 C= CEq (. 1) c m − 20.9 %O2d
Where: representative operating data to manifolded with batch process vents, Cc = concentration of TOC or total determine the fraction of the total flow you must demonstrate initial organic HAP or hydrogen halide due to supplemental gas: compliance for the other vents either as and halogen corrected to 3 percent part of the initial compliance + oxygen, dry basis, ppmv; Qs Qa demonstration for the batch vents, or CC= (.Eq 2) you must conduct multiple Cm = total concentration of TOC or total am Q organic HAP or hydrogen halide a demonstrations (one for the batch vents, and halogen in vented gas stream, Where: and one or more for the other vents). average of samples, dry basis, Ca = corrected outlet TOC, organic HAP, § 63.2475 What are my monitoring device ppmv; and hydrogen halides and halogens installation, operation, and maintenance %02d = concentration of oxygen concentration, dry basis, ppmv; requirements? measured in vented gas stream, dry Cm = actual TOC, organic HAP, and (a) Each continuous emissions basis, percent by volume. hydrogen halides and halogens monitoring system (CEMS) must be (2) Noncombustion devices. If you use concentration measured at control installed, operated, and maintained a control device other than a device outlet, dry basis, ppmv; according to the requirements in combustion device to comply with a Qa = total volumetric flow rate of all gas paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this TOC, organic HAP, or hydrogen halide streams vented to the control section. outlet concentration emission device, except supplemental gases; (1) Each CEMS must be installed, limitation, you must correct the actual Qs = total volumetric flow rate of operated, and maintained according to concentration for supplemental gases supplemental gases. the applicable Performance using Equation 2 of this section; you (h) Combination of batch vents with Specification of 40 CFR part 60, may use process knowledge and other vents. If other vents are appendix B, and according to paragraph
VerDate 11
(a)(2) of this section, except as specified Administrator in the Notification of (4) Shield the temperature sensor in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section. For Compliance Status. system from electromagnetic any CEMS meeting Performance (ii) [Reserved]. interference and chemical Specification 8, you must also comply (4) As specified in § 63.8(c)(4)(ii), contaminants. with appendix F, procedure 1 of 40 CFR each CEMS must complete a minimum (5) If a chart recorder is used, it must part 60. of one cycle of operation (sampling, have a sensitivity in the minor division (i) If you wish to use a CEMS other analyzing, and data recording) for each of at least 11°C. than an Fourier Transform Infrared successive 15-minute period. (6) Perform an electronic calibration Spectroscopy (FTIR) meeting the (5) The CEMS data must be reduced at least semiannually according to the requirements of Performance to operating day or operating block procedures in the manufacturer’s Specification 15 to measure averages computed using valid data owners manual. Following the hydrochloric acid (HCl) before we from at least 75 percent of the hours electronic calibration, you must conduct promulgate a Performance Specification during the averaging period. To have a a temperature sensor validation check in for such CEMS, you must prepare a valid hour of data, you must have four which a second or redundant monitoring plan and submit it for or more data points equally spaced over temperature sensor placed nearby the approval in accordance with the the 1-hour period (or at least two data process temperature sensor must yield a procedures specified in § 63.8. points during an hour when calibration, reading within 16.7°C of the process (ii) [Reserved]. quality assurance, or maintenance temperature sensor’s reading. (2) You must determine the activities are being performed). An (7) Conduct calibration and validation calibration gases and reporting units for operating block is a period of time from checks any time the sensor exceeds the TOC CEMS in accordance with the beginning to end of a batch process. manufacturer’s specified maximum paragraph (a)(2)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this Operating block averages may be used operating temperature range or install a section. only for batch processes. new temperature sensor. (i) For CEMS meeting Performance (6) If you add supplemental gases, you (8) At least monthly, inspect all Specification 9 or 15 requirements, must correct the measured components for integrity and all determine the target analyte(s) for concentrations in accordance with electrical connections for continuity, calibration using either process § 63.2470(g). oxidation, and galvanic corrosion. knowledge of the control device inlet (b) You must install, operate, and (d) For each flow measurement stream or the screening procedures of maintain each continuous parameter device, you must meet the requirements Method 18 on the control device inlet monitoring system (CPMS) according to in paragraphs (b) and (d)(1) through (5) stream. the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) of this section. (ii) For CEMS meeting Performance through (4) of this section. (1) Locate the flow sensor and other Specification 8 used to monitor (1) The CPMS must complete a necessary equipment such as performance of a combustion device, minimum of one cycle of operation for straightening vanes in a position that calibrate the instrument on the each successive 15-minute period. You provides a representative flow. (2) Use a flow sensor with a minimum predominant HAP and report the results must have a minimum of four tolerance of 2 percent of the flow rate. as carbon (C1), and use Method 25A or successive cycles of operation to have a any approved alternative as the (3) Reduce swirling flow or abnormal valid hour of data. velocity distributions due to upstream reference method for the relative (2) Have valid data from at least 75 accuracy tests. and downstream disturbances. percent of the hours during the (4) Conduct a flow sensor calibration (iii) For CEMS meeting Performance averaging period. Specification 8 used to monitor check at least semiannually. (3) Determine the average of all (5) At least monthly, inspect all performance of a noncombustion recorded readings associated with each components for integrity, all electrical device, determine the predominant HAP operating limit for each operating day or connections for continuity, and all using either process knowledge or the operating block. An operating block is a mechanical connections for leakage. screening procedures of Method 18 on period of time that is equal to the time (e) For each pressure measurement the control device inlet stream, calibrate from the beginning to end of a batch device, you must meet the requirements the monitor on the predominant HAP, process. Operating block averages may in paragraphs (b) and (e)(1) through (7) and report the results as C1. Use Method be used only for batch processes. of this section. 18, ASTM D6420–99, or any approved (4) Record the results of each (1) Locate the pressure sensor(s) in or alternative as the reference method for inspection, calibration, and validation as close to a position that provides a the relative accuracy tests, and report check. representative measurement of the the results as C1. (c) For each temperature monitoring pressure. (3) You must conduct a performance device, you must meet the requirements (2) Minimize or eliminate pulsating evaluation of each CEMS according to in paragraphs (b) and (c)(1) through (8) pressure, vibration, and internal and the requirements in § 63.8 and of this section. external corrosion. according to the applicable Performance (1) Locate the temperature sensor in a (3) Use a gauge with a minimum Specification of 40 CFR part 60, position that provides a representative tolerance of 0.5 inch of water or a appendix B, except as specified in temperature. transducer with a minimum tolerance of paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section. (2) For a noncryogenic temperature 1 percent of the pressure range. (i) If you have an existing source, the range, use a temperature sensor with a (4) Check pressure tap pluggage daily. requirement in § 63.8(e)(4) to conduct minimum tolerance of 2.2°C or 0.75 (5) Using a manometer, check gauge the performance evaluation not later percent of the temperature value, calibration quarterly and transducer than 180 days after the compliance date whichever is larger. calibration monthly. does not apply for the purposes of this (3) For a cryogenic temperature range, (6) Conduct calibration checks any subpart. In this situation, you must use a temperature sensor with a time the sensor exceeds the conduct the performance evaluation for minimum tolerance of 2.2°C or 2 manufacturer’s specified maximum the CEMS prior to the compliance date, percent of the temperature value, operating pressure range or install a new and you must submit the results to the whichever is larger. pressure sensor.
VerDate 11
(7) At least monthly, inspect all all of the data you collected during all the HAP factor that you achieve by components for integrity, all electrical other periods in assessing the operation reducing HAP that are also volatile connections for continuity, and all of the control device and associated organic compounds (VOC), you must mechanical connections for leakage. control system. demonstrate an equivalent reduction in (f) For each pH measurement device, the production-indexed VOC you must meet the requirements in § 63.2490 How do I demonstrate consumption factor (VOC factor) on a continuous compliance with the emission paragraphs (b) and (f)(1) through (4) of limitations and work practice standards? mass basis. For any reduction in the this section. HAP factor that you achieve by reducing (a) You must demonstrate continuous (1) Locate the pH sensor in a position a HAP that is not a VOC, you may not compliance with each emission that provides a representative increase the VOC factor. limitation and work practice standard in measurement of pH. (2) You may comply with the (2) Ensure the sample is properly Tables 1 through 8 of this subpart that requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this mixed and representative of the fluid to applies to you according to methods section for a series of processes, be measured. specified in Tables 17, 18, and 19 of this including situations where multiple (3) Check the pH meter’s calibration subpart. processes are merged, if you (b) You must report each instance in on at least two points every 8 hours of demonstrate to the satisfaction of the which you did not meet each emission process operation. Administrator that the multiple limitation and each operating limit in (4) At least monthly, inspect all processes were merged after the baseline Tables 17 and 18 of this subpart that components for integrity and all period into an existing process or applies to you. This includes periods of electrical connections for continuity. processes. (g) If flow to a control device could be startup, shutdown, and malfunction. (b) Exclusions. (1) You must comply intermittent, you must install, calibrate, You must also report each instance in with the emission limitations and work and operate a flow indicator at the inlet which you did not meet the practice standards contained in Tables 2 or outlet of the control device to identify requirements in Table 19 of this subpart through 5 of this subpart for all HAP periods of no flow. that apply to you. These instances are that are generated in the MCPU and that deviations from the emission limitations are not part of the HAP factor. Hydrogen § 63.2480 How do I demonstrate initial and work practice standards in this halides that are generated as a result of compliance with the emission limitations subpart. These deviations must be and work practice standards? combustion control must be controlled reported according to the requirements according to the requirements of Table (a) You must demonstrate initial in § 63.2520. 7 of this subpart. compliance with each emission (c) During periods of startup, (2) You may not merge nondedicated limitation and work practice standard shutdown, and malfunction, you must formulation or nondedicated solvent that applies to you according to Tables operate in accordance with the startup, recovery processes with any other 10 through 16 of this subpart. shutdown, and malfunction plan. processes. (b) You must establish each site- (d) Consistent with §§ 63.6(e) and (3) You may not comply with specific operating limit in Table 8 of 63.7(e)(1), deviations that occur during paragraph (a) of this section for transfer this subpart that applies to you a period of startup, shutdown, or operations that are subject to the according to the requirements in malfunction are not violations if you emission limitations and work practice § 63.2470(d), (e), or (f). demonstrate to the Administrator’s standards in Table 6 of this subpart. (c) You must submit the Notification satisfaction that you were operating in (c) Initial compliance procedures. To of Compliance Status containing the accordance with the SSMP. The demonstrate initial compliance with results of the initial compliance Administrator will determine whether paragraph (a) of this section, you must demonstration according to the deviations that occur during a period of prepare a demonstration summary in requirements in § 63.2515(e). startup, shutdown, or malfunction are accordance with paragraph (c)(1) of this violations, according to the provisions Continuous Compliance Requirements section and calculate baseline and target in § 63.6(e). annual HAP and VOC factors in § 63.2485 How do I monitor and collect Alternative Means of Compliance accordance with paragraphs (c)(2) and data to demonstrate continuous (3) of this section. compliance? § 63.2495 How do I comply with the (1) Demonstration summary. You (a) You must monitor and collect data pollution prevention standard? must prepare a pollution prevention according to this section. (a) If you have an existing affected demonstration summary that contains, (b) Except for monitor malfunctions, source, you may elect to comply with at a minimum, the information in associated repairs, and required quality the pollution prevention alternative paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iii) of this assurance or control activities requirements specified in paragraphs (a) section for each MCPU for which you (including, as applicable, calibration (1) and (2) of this section in lieu of the comply with paragraph (a) of this checks and required zero and span emission limitations and work practice section. You must include the adjustments), you must monitor standards contained in Tables 2 through demonstration summary in the continuously (or collect data at all 5 of this subpart for any MCPU. Precompliance report required in Table required intervals) at all times that the (1) You must reduce the production- 20 of this subpart and § 63.2520(c). affected source is operating. indexed HAP consumption factor (HAP (i) Descriptions of the methodologies (c) You must not use data recorded factor) by at least 65 percent from a 3- and forms used to measure and record during monitoring malfunctions, year average baseline beginning no consumption of HAP and VOC associated repairs, required quality earlier than the 1994 through 1996 compounds. assurance or control activities, and calendar years. Alternatively, for a (ii) Descriptions of the methodologies periods of no flow in data averages and process that has been operating for less and forms used to measure and record calculations used to report emission or than 3 years but more than 1 year, you production of the product(s). operating levels, nor may such data be may calculate the baseline factor for the (iii) Supporting documentation for the used in fulfilling a minimum data time period from startup of the process descriptions provided in accordance availability requirement. You must use until the present. For any reduction in with paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii) of this
VerDate 11
section including, but not limited to, (i) If you produce more than 10 (3) Emission streams controlled to an operator log sheets and copies of daily, batches during a month, you must outlet concentration less than or equal monthly, and annual inventories of calculate the annual factors at least once to 20 ppmv may not be used in any materials and products. You must show during that month. averaging group. how this documentation will be used to (ii) If you produce less than 10 (4) Maintenance wastewater streams calculate the annual factors required in batches in a 12-month period, you must and wastewater streams treated in paragraph (d) of this section. calculate the annual factors for the biological treatment units may not be (2) Baseline factors. You must number of batches in the 12-month included in any averaging group. calculate baseline HAP and VOC factors period since the previous calculations. (5) Processes which have been by dividing the consumption of total (e) Records. You must keep records of permanently shut down and storage HAP and total VOC by the production HAP and VOC consumption, tanks permanently taken out of HAP rate, per process, for the first 3-year production, and the rolling annual HAP service may not be included in any period in which the process was and VOC factors for each MCPU for averaging group. operational, beginning no earlier than which you are complying with (6) Emission points already controlled the period consisting of the 1994 paragraph (a) of this section. on or before November 15, 1990 may not through 1996 calendar years. (f) Reporting. (1) You must include be used to generate emissions averaging Alternatively, for a process that has the pollution-prevention demonstration credits, unless the level of control has been operational for less than 3 years, summary in the Precompliance report been increased after November 15, 1990. but more than 1 year, the baseline required by Table 20 of this subpart and In these cases, credit will be allowed factors must be established for the time § 63.2520(c). only for the increase in control after period from startup of the process until (2) You must identify all days when November 15, 1990. April 4, 2002. the annual factors were above the target (7) Emission points controlled to (3) Target annual factors. You must factors in the compliance reports. comply with a State or Federal rule calculate a target annual HAP factor that other than this subpart may not be is equal to or less than 35 percent of the § 63.2500 How do I comply with emissions included in an emissions averaging baseline HAP factor. For each reduction averaging? group, unless the level of control has in a HAP that is also a VOC, you must (a) For an existing source, you may been increased after November 15, 1990, calculate a target annual VOC factor that elect to comply with the percent above what is required by the other is lower than the baseline VOC factor by reduction emission limitations in Tables State or Federal rule. Only the control an equivalent amount on a mass basis. 1 through 4 of this subpart by For each reduction in a HAP that is not complying with the emissions averaging above what is required by the other a VOC, the target annual VOC factor provisions according to paragraphs (b) State or Federal rule will be credited. must be equal to or less than the through (e) of this section for groups of However, if an emission point has been baseline VOC factor. as many as 40 emission points. Each used to generate emissions averaging (d) Continuous compliance batch process represents one emission credit in an approved emissions requirements. You must calculate point for the purposes of emissions average, and the point is subsequently annual rolling average values of the averaging. made subject to a State or Federal rule HAP and VOC factors (annual factors) in (b) Exclusions. You may not include other than this subpart, the point can accordance with the procedures the emission points specified in continue to generate emissions specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through paragraphs (b)(1) through (7) of this averaging credit for the purpose of (3) of this section. To show continuous section in an emissions average. complying with the previously compliance, the annual factors must be (1) Any emission points for which approved average. equal to or less than the target annual State authorities prohibit the use of (c) Compliance procedures. To factors calculated according to emissions averaging and require demonstrate compliance with the paragraph (c)(3) of this section. compliance with the emission emissions averaging provisions, you (1) To calculate the annual factors, limitations and work practice standards must comply with the requirements of you must divide the consumption of in Tables 1 through 4 of this subpart. paragraphs (c)(1) through (7) of this both total HAP and total VOC by the (2) Emission points that are controlled section. production rate, per process, for 12- as specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) (1) Emissions averaging plan. You month periods at the frequency through (iv) may not be used to must develop and submit for approval specified in either paragraph (d)(2) or calculate emissions averaging credits, an emissions averaging plan according (3) of this section, as applicable. unless a nominal efficiency has been to paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (vi) of (2) For continuous processes, you assigned according to the procedures in this section. must calculate the annual factors every § 63.150(i). The nominal efficiency must (i) The emissions averaging plan must 30 days for the 12-month period exceed the percent reduction required demonstrate that the emissions from the preceding the 30th day (i.e., annual by Tables 1 through 4 of this subpart. emission points proposed to be rolling average calculated every 30 (i) Affected storage tanks controlled included in the average will not result days). A process with both batch and with an internal floating roof meeting in greater hazard or, at the option of the continuous operations is considered a the specifications of § 63.1063(a)(1)(i), permitting authority, greater risk to continuous process for the purposes of or an external floating roof meeting the human health or the environment than this section. specifications of § 63.1063(a)(1)(ii). if the emission points were controlled (3) For batch processes, you must (ii) Emission points controlled with a according to Tables 1 through 4 of this calculate the annual factors every 10 flare. subpart. batches for the 12-month period (iii) Waste management units (ii) The demonstration of hazard or preceding the 10th batch (i.e., annual controlled as specified in §§ 63.133 risk equivalency must be made to the rolling average calculated every 10 through 63.137. satisfaction of the operating permit batches), except as specified in (iv) Wastewater treated in a steam authority, and we may require you to paragraphs (d)(3)(i) and (ii) of this stripper meeting the specifications in use specific methodologies and section. § 63.138(d). procedures such as any guidance that
VerDate 11
we prepare or any other technically (vi) You must submit the emissions debit-generating emission points must sound information or methods. averaging plan no later than 18 months be made under representative operating (iii) An emissions averaging plan that prior to the compliance date of this conditions. After the compliance date, does not demonstrate hazard or risk subpart. We will determine within 120 actual operating data must be used for equivalency to our satisfaction will not calendar days whether your emissions all debit and credit calculations. be approved. We may require such averaging plan presents sufficient (iv) Demonstrate that debits adjustments to the emissions averaging information. We will either approve the calculated for a quarterly (3-month) plan as are necessary in order to ensure emissions averaging plan, request period according to paragraph (c)(5) of that the average will not result in greater changes, or request additional this section are not more than 1.30 times hazard or risk to human health or the information from you. Once we receive the credits for the same period environment than would result if the sufficient information, we will approve, calculated according to paragraph (c)(6) emission points were controlled disapprove, or request changes to the of this section. You determine according to the emission limitations plan within 120 days. If we disapprove compliance for the quarter based on the and work practice standards in Tables 1 the emissions averaging plan, you must ratio of credits and debits from that through 4 of this subpart. still be in compliance with the emission quarter, with 30 percent more debits (iv) A hazard or risk equivalency limitations and work practice standards than credits allowed on a quarterly demonstration must satisfy the in Tables 1 through 4 of this subpart by basis. requirements specified in paragraphs the compliance date. (v) Record and report quarterly and (c)(1)(iv)(A) through (C) of this section. (2) For all points included in an (A) Be a quantitative, comparative annual credits and debits as required in emissions average, you must comply paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section. chemical hazard or risk assessment. with the procedures that are specified in (B) Account for differences between (3) You may not include emissions paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (v) of this during periods of malfunction in averaging and nonaveraging options in section. chemical hazard or risk to human health calculation of credits and debits. You (i) Calculate and record monthly may not include periods of startup and or the environment. debits for all affected emission points (C) Meet any requirements we set for shutdown for continuous processes in that are controlled to a level less such demonstrations. calculation of credits and debits. (v) For all emission points included in stringent than required by the emission (4) During periods of monitoring emissions averaging, the emissions limitations for those emission points. deviations, you must adjust credits and averaging plan must include the Use equations in paragraph (c)(5) of this debits as specified in paragraphs (c)(4)(i) information listed in paragraphs section to calculate debits. through (iii) of this section. (c)(1)(v)(A) through (E) of this section. (ii) Calculate and record monthly credits for all emission points that are (i) Assign no credits to the credit- (A) The identification of all emission generating emission point. points in each emissions average. overcontrolled to compensate for the debits. Use equations in paragraph (c)(6) (ii) Assign maximum debits to the (B) The uncontrolled and controlled debit-generating emission point. HAP emissions for all of the emission of this section to calculate credits. All (iii) You may demonstrate to the points included to calculate the debits process vent, storage tank, and Administrator that full or partial credits and credits in paragraphs (c)(5) and (6) wastewater emission points except or debits should be assigned using the of this section. those specified in paragraph (b) of this (C) The debit and credit calculations. section may be included in the credit procedures in § 63.150(l). (D) The estimated values for all calculation. (5) Debits. Debits are generated by the operating limits set according to (iii) Demonstrate that annual credits difference between the actual emissions § 63.2470(d), (e), or (f) and Table 8 of calculated according to paragraph (c)(6) from an affected emission point that is this subpart for each emission point of this section are greater than or equal uncontrolled or controlled to a level less included in the averages. to debits calculated according to stringent than the applicable standard (E) A statement that the initial and paragraph (c)(5) of this section for the and the emissions allowed for the continuous compliance demonstrations same annual compliance period. The affected emission point. Calculate debits and associated reporting and initial demonstration in the emissions in accordance with the procedures recordkeeping in this section for each averaging plan or operating permit specified in paragraphs (c)(5)(i) through emission point in the averages will be application that credit-generating (iv) of this section. implemented beginning on the emission points will be capable of (i) Calculate sourcewide debits using compliance date. generating sufficient credits to offset the Equation 1 of this section:
n n n =− +− − Debits∑∑∑[] EPViA(.002 ) () EPV iU [] ESiA (0.05) () ESiU +[] EWWiA () EWW iC (Eq. 1) i=1 i=1 i=1
Where: EPViA = actual emissions from each ESiU = uncontrolled emissions from affected continuous process vent i storage tank i calculated according Debits and all terms of Equation 1 of and batch process i that is to the procedures specified in this section are in units of Mg/month, uncontrolled or is controlled to a paragraph (c)(5)(iii) of this section; and; level less stringent than the ES = actual emissions from each EPV = uncontrolled emissions from iA iU required 98 percent reduction in affected storage vessel i that is continuous process vent i and batch Table 1 or 2 of this subpart. uncontrolled or is controlled to a process i calculated according to Calculate EPViA using the level less stringent than the the procedures specified in procedures in paragraph (c)(5)(ii) of required 95 percent reduction in paragraph (c)(5)(ii) of this section; this section; Table 4 of this subpart. Calculate
VerDate 11
ESiA using the procedures in (A) Except as provided in paragraph or (iii), as appropriate, except that when paragraph (c)(5)(iii) of this section; (c)(5)(ii)(C) of this section, calculate § 63.150(g)(3)(ii)(B) refers to the EWWiC = emissions from each affected uncontrolled emissions for process procedures in § 63.120(d) for wastewater stream i if the vents using the procedures specified in determining percent reduction for a wastewater stream had been § 63.1257(d)(2). control device, § 63.1257(a)(1) shall managed and treated as specified in (B) Except as provided in paragraph apply for the purposes of this subpart. Table 3 of this subpart. Calculate (c)(5)(ii)(C) of this section, calculate (iv) Calculate emissions from EWWiC using the procedures in actual emissions for process vents using paragraph (c)(5)(iv) of this section; the procedures specified in wastewater using the procedures EWWiA = actual emissions from each § 63.1257(d)(2) and (3), as applicable. specified in § 63.150(g)(5). affected wastewater stream i that is (C) As an alternative to the procedures (6) Credits. Credits are generated by uncontrolled or has been managed described in paragraphs (c)(5)(ii)(A) and the difference between emissions that and treated in a manner that is less (B) of this section, for continuous are allowed for each affected and stringent than that specified in process vents, you may calculate nonaffected emission point, and the Table 3 of this subpart. Calculate uncontrolled and actual emissions by actual emissions from that affected or EWWiA using the procedures in the procedures described in nonaffected emission point that have paragraph (c)(5)(iv) of this section; § 63.150(g)(2). For purposes of been controlled after November 15, 1990 n = the number of emission points being complying with this paragraph, the term to a level more stringent than what is included in the emissions average; ‘‘recovery device’’ in § 63.150(g)(2) required in this subpart or any other the value of n is not necessarily the means ‘‘process condenser.’’ State or Federal rule or statute. same for process vents, storage (iii) Calculate uncontrolled emissions Calculate credits in accordance with the tanks, and wastewater. from storage tanks in accordance with (ii) Calculate emissions from process the procedures described in procedures specified in paragraphs vents in accordance with the procedures § 63.150(g)(3)(i). Calculate actual (c)(6)(i) through (v) of this section. specified in paragraphs (c)(5)(ii)(A) emissions from storage tanks using the (i) Calculate sourcewide credits using through (C) of this section. procedures specified in § 63.150(g)(3)(ii) Equation 2 of this section:
n m n − +− − Credits = D∑∑∑[] (0.02) ()EPV1iU EPViA D() EPV2iB EPV2) iA + D[] (0.05) (ES1iU ES1 iA i=1 i=1 i=1 m n m − − − + D∑∑() ES2iB ES2 iA + D() EWW1iC EWW1 iA + D ∑() EWW2iB EWW2 iA (Eq. 2) i=1 i=1 i=1
Where: paragraph (c)(6)(iii)(C) of this managed and treated as specified in Credits and all terms in Equation 2 of section; Table 3 of this subpart. Calculate this section are in units of Mg/month, EPV2iA = actual emissions from each EWW1iC according to the the baseline date is November 15, 1990, nonaffected continuous process procedures in paragraph (c)(6)(v) of the terms consisting of a constant vent i and batch process i that is this section; controlled. Calculate EPV2 multiplied by the uncontrolled iA EWW1iA = emissions from each affected emissions are the emissions from each according to the procedures in wastewater stream i that is emission point subject to a percent paragraph (c)(6)(iii)(C) of this controlled to a level more stringent reduction requirement in Table 1, 2, or section; than if the wastewater stream had 4 of this subpart that are controlled to ES1iU = uncontrolled emissions from been managed and treated as a level more stringent than the each affected storage tank i specified in Table 3 of this subpart. calculated according to the applicable percent reduction Calculate EWW1iA according to the requirement, and; procedures in paragraph (c)(6)(iv) of procedures in paragraph (c)(6)(v) of this section; this section; EPV1iU = uncontrolled emissions from ES1 = actual emissions from each iA EWW2 = emissions from each each affected continuous process affected storage tank i that is iB nonaffected wastewater stream i at vent i and batch process i controlled to a level more stringent the baseline date. Calculate calculated according to the than 95 percent. Calculate ES1 iA EWW2 according to the procedures in paragraph according to the procedures in iB procedures in paragraph (c)(6)(v) of (c)(6)(iii)(A) of this section; paragraph (c)(6)(iv) of this section; this section; EPV1iA = actual emissions from each ES2iB = emissions from each affected continuous process vent i nonaffected storage tank i at the EWW2iA = actual emissions from each and batch process i that is baseline date. Calculate ES2iB nonaffected wastewater stream i controlled to a level more stringent according to the procedures in that is controlled. Calculate than 98 percent. Calculate EPV1iA paragraph (c)(6)(iv) of this section; EWW2iA according to the according to the procedures in ES2iA = actual emissions from each procedures in paragraph (c)(6)(v) of paragraph (c)(6)(iii)(B) of this nonaffected storage tank i that is this section; section; controlled. Calculate ES2iA n = number of affected emission points EPV2iB = emissions from each according to the procedures in that are included in the emissions nonaffected continuous process paragraph (c)(6)(iv) of this section; average. The value of n is not vent i and batch process i at the EWW1iC = emissions from each affected necessarily the same for process baseline date. Calculate EPV2iB wastewater stream i if the vents, storage tanks, and according to the procedures in wastewater stream had been wastewater;
VerDate 11
m = number of nonaffected emission determine the nominal efficiency for the procedures in paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(A) points included in the emissions calculating credits as described in or (C) of this section. average. The value of m is not § 63.150(j). (B) Calculate actual emissions from necessarily the same for process (iii) Calculate emissions from process affected process vents with a nominal vents, storage tanks, and vents in accordance with the procedures efficiency greater than 98 percent or a wastewater; D = discount factor equal to 0.9 for all specified in paragraphs (c)(6)(iii)(A) pollution prevention measure that credit-generating emission points. through (C) of this section. achieves reductions greater than 98 percent using Equation 3 of this section: (ii) For an emission point controlled (A) Calculate uncontrolled emissions using a pollution prevention measure, from affected process vents according to
=×− EPV1iA EPV 1 iU[] 1 N eff /(.) 100 Eq 3
Where: (1) The emissions averaging plan as (B) To an outlet concentration of EPV1iA = actual emissions from each specified in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this hydrogen halides and halogens of 20 affected continuous process vent i section. ppmv or less. or batch process i that is controlled (2) The required information for (C) As an alternative to paragraph to a level more stringent than 98 compliance reports specified in (a)(1)(ii)(B) of this section, if you control percent; § 63.2520(d) for each emission point in halogenated vent streams emitted from EPV1iU = uncontrolled emissions from emission averages. a combustion device followed by a each affected continuous process (3) The compliance reports must also scrubber, you may reduce the hydrogen vent i or batch process i; halides and halogens generated in the include the information specified in ≥ Neff = nominal efficiency of control paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (iv) of this combustion device by 95 percent by device or pollution prevention section. weight in the scrubber and establish operating parameters for the scrubber in measure, percent. (i) Any changes to the processes, (C) Calculate baseline and actual accordance with Table 8 of this subpart. storage tanks, or waste management (ii) If you use a noncombustion emissions from nonaffected process units included in an emissions average. vents according to the procedures in control device, it must reduce HAP (ii) The calculation of the debits and emissions to an outlet total organic HAP § 63.150(c)(2)(iii) and (iv), except when credits for the reporting period. concentration of 50 ppmv or less, and the phrase ‘‘paragraph (g)(2)’’ is referred (iii) Changes to the emissions an outlet concentration of hydrogen to in § 63.150(h)(2)(iii) and (iv), the averaging plan which affect the halides and halogens of 50 ppmv or less. provisions in paragraph (c)(5)(ii) of this calculation methodology of (2) You must comply with the work section apply for the purposes of this uncontrolled or controlled emissions or practice standards for closed-vent subpart. the hazard or risk equivalency systems in Table 5 of this subpart. (iv) Calculate uncontrolled emissions determination. (3) Any batch process vents within a from storage tanks according to the (iv) Any changes to the operating process that are not controlled procedures described in paragraph according to this alternative standard § 63.150(g)(3)(i). Calculate actual and limits monitored according to paragraph (c)(7) of this section. must be controlled according to the baseline emissions from storage tanks emission limitations and work practice according to the procedures specified in § 63.2505 How do I comply with the standards in Table 2 of this subpart. § 63.150(h)(3), except when alternative standard? (b) Initial compliance requirements. § 63.150(h)(3) refers to § 63.150(g)(3)(i). As an alternative to complying with You demonstrate initial compliance (v) Calculate emissions from the emission limitations and work with the alternative standard if you wastewater using the procedures in practice standards for process vents and comply with the requirements in § 63.150(h)(5). storage tanks in Tables 1, 2, and 4 of this paragraphs (b)(1) through (6) of this (7) You must establish and comply section. with the operating limits for each subpart, you may comply with the emission limitations in paragraph (a) of (1) Install and begin to operate and emission point in an emissions average maintain each CEMS in accordance with according to § 63.2470 and Table 8 of this section and demonstrate initial and continuous compliance in accordance paragraph (c) of this section no later this subpart. than the date 3 years after the effective (d) Records. You must maintain the with the requirements in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section. Reporting and date of this subpart. records specified in paragraphs (d)(1) (2) Conduct a performance evaluation recordkeeping requirements are and (4) of this section. of the CEMS as specified in specified in §§ 63.2520 and 63.2525. (1) All records specified in § 63.2525. § 63.2475(a)(3). (2) Calculations of the debits and (a) Emission limitations and work (3) Submit the results of any credits according to paragraphs (c)(5) practice standards. (1) You must route determination of the target analytes or and (6) of this section for the last quarter vent streams through a closed-vent predominant HAP in the Notification of and the prior four quarters. system to a control device that reduces Compliance Status. (3) A current copy of the emissions HAP emissions as specified in either (4) If you add supplemental gases to averaging plan. paragraph (a)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section. the vent stream or manifold, determine (4) The number of turnovers for each (i) If you use a combustion control either the oxygen concentration (if you storage tank used in an emissions device, it must reduce HAP emissions as use a combustion device), or both the average. specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i)(A), (B), total vent stream and supplemental gas (e) Reporting. You must submit the and (C) of this section. stream flow rates (if you use a information specified in paragraphs (A) To an outlet TOC concentration of noncombustion device), and calculate (e)(1) and (2) of this section. 20 ppmv or less. the ratio in Equation 1 or 2 of § 63.2470
VerDate 11
to use in correcting the measured for such monitors, you must prepare a less, you must maintain a minimum concentrations for supplemental gases. monitoring plan and submit it for residence time of 0.5 seconds and a (5) If you elect to comply with the approval in accordance with the minimum combustion chamber requirement to reduce hydrogen halides procedures specified in § 63.8. temperature of 760°C. and halogens by ≥95 percent by weight (iii) You do not need to monitor the (B) If complying with the alternative in paragraph (a)(1)(i)(C) of this section, hydrogen halide and halogen standard instead of complying with an you must demonstrate initial concentrations if, based on process emission limitation of 98 percent or compliance by conducting a knowledge, you determine that the less, you must maintain a minimum performance test and setting a site- emission stream does not contain residence time of 0.75 seconds and a specific operating limit(s) for the hydrogen halides or halogens. minimum combustion chamber scrubber in accordance with entry 2.b. (iv) If you elect to comply with the temperature of 816°C. in Table 16 of this subpart. The requirement to reduce hydrogen halides (ii) Provisions for dense gas systems. applicable operating limits are specified and halogens by ≥95 percent by weight As an alternative to correcting for in Table 8 of this subpart. You must in paragraph (a)(1)(i)(C) of this section, supplemental gases as specified in submit the results of the initial you must comply with the requirements § 63.2470(g), for noncombustion devices compliance demonstration in the in paragraphs (c)(1)(iv)(A) through (C) of used to control emissions from dense Notification of Compliance Status. this section. gas systems, as defined in § 63.2550, (6) Comply with the requirements for (A) Install, operate, and maintain you must monitor flowrate as specified closed-vent systems in entries (c) and CPMS for the scrubber as specified in in paragraphs (d)(7)(ii)(A) through (D) of (d) of Table 14 of this subpart. § 63.2475(b) through (f), as applicable. this section. (c) Continuous compliance (B) Collect and reduce CPMS data for (A) Use Equation 1 of this section to requirements. You demonstrate the scrubber in accordance with the calculate the system flowrate setpoint at continuous compliance with the requirements specified in entry 5., 6., or which the average concentration is emission limitations in paragraph (a) of 7. of Table 18 of this subpart, as 5,000 ppmv TOC: this section according to the applicable. 721× E requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) (C) Maintain the daily or block Q = an ()Eq. 1 through (7) of this section. average CPMS levels within the ranges set 5, 000 (1) Except as specified in paragraphs established during the initial Where: (c)(1)(iii) and (iv) of this section, you performance test. must install, operate, and maintain (2) You must install, calibrate, and Qset = system flowrate setpoint, scfm; E = annual emissions entering the CEMS to measure TOC and total operate a flow indicator as specified in an control device, lbmoles/yr. hydrogen halide and halogen § 63.2475(g). concentrations in accordance with (3) You must monitor and collect data (B) Annual emissions used in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii) of this according to § 63.2485(b) and (c). Equation 1 of this section must be based section and in accordance with (4) You must demonstrate continuous on the actual mass of organic § 63.2475(a)(1), (2), and (4), and you compliance with the work practice compounds entering the control device must reduce the CEMS data as specified standards for closed-vent systems as as calculated from the most in § 63.2475(a)(5). If you add specified in entries (i) and (j) in Table representative emissions inventory data supplemental gases to the vent stream or 19 of this subpart. that you submitted within the 5 years manifold, you must correct measured (5) You must report each deviation before the Notification of Compliance concentrations for supplemental gases according to § 63.2490(b). Status is due. You must recalculate the or monitor other operating parameters (6) You must comply with the startup, system flowrate setpoint once every 5 as specified in paragraph (c)(7) of this shutdown, and malfunction years using the annual emissions from section. The reduced results must be requirements in § 63.2490(c) and (d). the most representative emissions below the concentration limits specified (7) Correction for supplemental gases. inventory data submitted during the 5- in paragraph (a) of this section. If you add supplemental gases to the year period after the previous (i) Install CEMS to measure TOC in vents or manifolds, you must either calculation. Results of the initial accordance with paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A) correct for supplemental gases as calculation must be included in the or (B) of this section. specified in § 63.2470(g) or comply with Notification of Compliance Status, and (A) For noncombustion devices, the requirements of paragraph (c)(7)(i) recalculated values must be included in install a CEMS that meets Performance or (ii) of this section. If you correct for the next compliance report after each Specification 8, 9, or 15. supplemental gases as specified in recalculation. For all calculations after (B) For combustion devices, install a § 63.2470(g)(2) for noncombustion the initial calculation, to use emissions CEMS that meets Performance control devices, you must evaluate the inventory data calculated using Specification 8 and report the results as flow rates as specified in paragraph procedures other than those specified in C1. (c)(7)(iii) of this section. § 63.1257(d), you must submit the (ii) Install CEMS to measure total (i) Provisions for combustion devices. emissions inventory data calculations halide and halogen concentrations in As an alternative to correcting for and rationale for their use in the accordance with paragraph (c)(1)(ii)(A) supplemental gases as specified in Precompliance report, Notification of or (B) of this section: § 63.2470(g), you must monitor Process Change report, or an application (A) Install a CEMS that meets residence time and firebox temperature for a part 70 permit renewal or revision. Performance Specification 15 to according to the requirements of (C) In the Notification of Compliance measure HCl; or paragraphs (d)(7)(i)(A) and (B) of this Status, you may elect to establish both (B) If you wish to measure HCl using section. Monitoring of residence time a maximum daily average operating a CEMS other than an Fourier may be accomplished by monitoring flowrate limit above the flowrate Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) flowrate into the combustion chamber. setpoint and a reduced outlet meeting the requirements of (A) If complying with the alternative concentration limit corresponding to Performance Specification 15 before we standard instead of complying with an this flowrate limit. You may also promulgate performance specifications emission limitation of 95 percent or establish reduced outlet concentration
VerDate 11
limits for any daily average flowrates from an affected wastewater stream) that days after you become subject to this between the flowrate setpoint and the contains less than 50 ppmw of HAP in subpart. flowrate limit. The correlation between Table 2 to subpart GGG of this part may (d) If you are required to conduct a these elevated flowrates and the be transferred offsite if the transferee performance test, you must submit a corresponding outlet concentration manages and treats the wastewater notification of intent to conduct a limits must be established using stream or residual in accordance with performance test at least 60 calendar Equation 2 of this section: paragraphs (e)(1)(i) and (ii) of this days before the performance test is section. scheduled to begin as required in Q C =×set 50()Eq. 2 (i) The wastewater stream or residual § 63.7(b)(1). a is treated in a biological treatment unit Qlim (e) Notification of Compliance Status. in accordance with §§ 63.138 and Where: If you are required to conduct a 63.145. performance test, design evaluation, or C = adjusted outlet concentration limit, a (ii) The waste management units up to other initial compliance demonstration dry basis, ppmv; the activated sludge unit are covered, or 50 = outlet concentration limit as specified in Tables 10 through 16 of you demonstrate that less than 5 percent this subpart, you must submit a associated with the flowrate of the total HAP in Table 3 to subpart setpoint, dry basis, ppmv; Notification of Compliance Status GGG of this part is emitted from the according to the schedule in paragraphs Qset = system flowrate setpoint, scfm; waste management units up to the (e)(1) and (2) of this section, and the Qlim = actual system flowrate limit, activated sludge unit. scfm. Notification of Compliance Status must (2) References in § 63.132(g) to contain the information specified in (D) You must install and operate a ‘‘Group 1’’ wastewater mean ‘‘affected’’ paragraph (e)(3) of this section. monitoring system for measuring system wastewater for the purposes of this (1) For an existing source in operation flowrate. The flowrate into the control subpart. device must be monitored and recorded on the effective date, you must submit (3) The references in § 63.132(g)(2) to the Notification of Compliance Status at least once every hour. The system ‘‘§§ 63.133 through 63.147’’ and in flowrate must be calculated as the no later than the compliance date § 63.132(g)(1)(ii) to ‘‘provisions of this specified in § 63.2445(b). For parts of an average of all values measured during subpart’’ (i.e., subpart G) refer to the each 24-hour operating day. The area source that become a major source process wastewater provisions in and an existing affected source, you flowrate monitoring sensor must have a §§ 63.2450 through 63.2490, 63.2520, minimum tolerance of 2 percent of the must submit the Notification of and 63.2525 for the purposes of this Compliance Status no later than the system flowrate setpoint, and the subpart. flowrate monitoring device must be compliance date specified in (4) The reference in § 63.132(g)(2) to § 63.2445(d)(2). calibrated at least semiannually. ‘‘§ 63.102(b) of subpart F’’ does not (iii) Flow rate evaluation for apply for the purposes of this subpart. (2) If you have a new source, noncombustion devices. To demonstrate (b) You must keep a record of the reconstructed source, or parts of a continuous compliance with the notice sent to the treatment operator former area source that are a new requirement to correct for supplemental stating that the wastewater stream or source, you must submit the gases as specified in § 63.2470(g)(2) for residual contains organic HAP which Notification of Compliance Status no noncombustion devices, you must are required to be managed and treated later than 240 days after the applicable evaluate the volumetric flow rate of in accordance with the provisions of compliance date specified in § 63.2445(a) or (d)(1). supplemental gases, Qs, and the this subpart. volumetric flow rate of all gases, Qa, (3) The Notification of Compliance each time a new operating scenario is Notification, Reports, and Records Status must include the information in implemented based on process § 63.2515 What notifications must I submit paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (viii) of this knowledge and representative operating and when? section. data. The procedures used to evaluate (a) You must submit all of the (i) The results of any applicability the flow rates, and the resulting notifications in §§ 63.6(h)(4) and (5), determinations, emission calculations, correction factor used in Equation 2 of 63.7(b) and (c), 63.8(e), 63.8(f)(4) and or analyses used to identify and § 63.2470, must be included in the (6), and 63.9(b) through (h) that apply to quantify HAP emissions from the Notification of Compliance Status and you by the dates specified. For any affected source. in the next compliance report submitted performance test required as part of the (ii) The results of emissions profiles, after an operating scenario change. initial compliance procedures for batch performance tests, engineering analyses, § 63.2510 How may I transfer wastewater process vents in Table 11 of this design evaluations, flare compliance to a treatment unit that I do not own or subpart, you must also submit the test assessments, inspections and repairs, operate? plan required by § 63.7(c) and the and calculations used to demonstrate (a) You may elect to transfer an emission profile with the Notification of initial compliance according to Tables affected wastewater stream or a residual the Performance Test. 10 through 16 of this subpart. For removed from an affected wastewater (b) As specified in § 63.9(b)(2), if you performance tests, results must include stream to an on-site treatment operation startup your affected source before the descriptions of sampling and analysis that you do not own or operate, or to an effective date of the subpart, you must procedures and quality assurance off-site treatment operation, according submit an Initial Notification not later procedures. to the requirements in § 63.132(g), than 120 calendar days after the (iii) Descriptions of monitoring except as specified in paragraphs (a)(1) effective date of the subpart. devices, monitoring frequencies, and the through (4) of this section. (c) As specified in § 63.9(b)(3), if you operating limits established during the (1) As an alternative to the startup your new or reconstructed initial compliance demonstrations, management and treatment options affected source on or after the effective including data and calculations to specified in § 63.132(g)(2), any affected date, you must submit an Initial support the levels you establish. wastewater stream (or residual removed Notification not later than 120 calendar (iv) Listing of all operating scenarios.
VerDate 11
(v) Descriptions of worst-case in Table 20 of this subpart and devices subject to entry 8. on Table 8 of operating and/or testing conditions for according to paragraphs (b)(1) through this subpart are operating as designed. control devices. (5) of this section. (3) A description of the test (vi) Identification of emission points (1) The first Compliance report must conditions, data, calculations, and other subject to overlapping requirements cover the period beginning on the information used to establish additional described in § 63.2535 and the authority compliance date that is specified for operating limits according to under which you will comply. your affected source in § 63.2445 and § 63.2470(e)(3). (vii) The information specified in ending on June 30 or December 31, (4) Data and rationale used to support § 63.1039(a)(1) through (3) for each whichever date is the first date an engineering assessment to calculate process subject to the work practice following the end of the first calendar uncontrolled emissions from process standards for equipment leaks in Table half after the compliance date that is vents as required in Table 11 of this 5 of this subpart. specified for your source in § 63.2445. subpart. (viii) If you are complying with the (2) The first Compliance report must (5) The pollution prevention vapor balancing work practice standard be postmarked or delivered no later than demonstration summary required in for storage tanks, include a statement to July 31 or January 31, whichever date § 63.2495(c)(1), if you are complying that effect, and a statement that the follows the end of the first calendar half with the pollution prevention pressure vent setting on the storage tank after the compliance date that is alternative. is equal to or greater than 2.5 pounds specified for your affected source in (d) Compliance report. The per square inch gauge (psig), as § 63.2445. Compliance report must contain the specified in Table 13 of this subpart. (3) Each subsequent Compliance information specified in paragraphs (f) Notification of Process Change. (1) report must cover the semiannual (d)(1) through (10) of this section. Except as specified in paragraph (f)(2) of reporting period from January 1 through (1) Company name and address. (2) Statement by a responsible official this section, whenever you make a June 30 or the semiannual reporting with that official’s name, title, and process change, or change any of the period from July 1 through December signature, certifying the accuracy of the information submitted in the 31. Notification of Compliance Status, you content of the report. (4) Each subsequent Compliance (3) Date of report and beginning and must submit a report semiannually. For report must be postmarked or delivered the purposes of this section, a process ending dates of the reporting period. no later than July 31 or January 31, (4) If you had a startup, shutdown, or change means the startup of a new whichever date is the first date process, as defined in § 63.2550. You malfunction during the reporting period following the end of the semiannual and you took actions consistent with may submit the notification as part of reporting period. the compliance report required under your startup, shutdown, and (5) For each affected source that is malfunction plan, the Compliance § 63.2520(d). The notification must subject to permitting regulations include all of the information in report must include the information in pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR § 63.10(d)(5)(i). paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through (iv) of this part 71, and if the permitting authority section. (5) The Compliance report must has established dates for submitting contain the information on deviations (i) A brief description of the process semiannual reports pursuant to 40 CFR change. according to paragraphs (d)(5)(i), (ii), 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR and (iii) of this section. (ii) A description of any modifications 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), you may submit the to standard procedures or quality (i) If there are no deviations from any first and subsequent Compliance reports emission limitations (emission limits assurance procedures. according to the dates the permitting (iii) Revisions to any of the and operating limits) that apply to you, authority has established instead of and there are no deviations from the information reported in the original according to the dates in paragraphs Notification of Compliance Status under requirements for work practice (b)(1) through (4) of this section. standards in Table 19 of this subpart, paragraph (e) of this section. (c) Precompliance report. You must (iv) Information required by the include a statement that there were no submit a Precompliance report to Notification of Compliance Status under deviations from the emission limitations request approval of any of the paragraph (e) of this section for changes or work practice standards during the information in paragraphs (c)(1) through involving the addition of processes or reporting period. (5) of this section. We will either equipment. (ii) For each deviation from an approve or disapprove the report within (2) You must submit a report 60 days emission limitation (emission limits and 90 days after we receive it. If we before the scheduled implementation operating limits) and for each deviation disapprove the report, you must still be date of either of the changes identified from the requirements for work practice in compliance with the emission in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) or (ii) of this standards in Table 19 of this subpart limitations and work practice standards section. that occurs at an affected source where (i) Any change in the activity covered in this subpart by the compliance date. you are not using a continuous by the Precompliance report. To change any of the information monitoring system (CMS) to comply (ii) A change in the status of a control submitted in the report, you must notify with the emission limitations or work device from small to large. us 60 days before the planned change is practice standards in this subpart, you to be implemented. must include the information in § 63.2520 What reports must I submit and (1) Requests for approval to set paragraphs (d)(5)(ii)(A) through (C) of when? operating limits for parameters other this section. This includes periods of (a) You must submit each report in than those in Table 8 of this subpart, startup, shutdown, and malfunction. Table 20 of this subpart that applies to and for control devices and treatment (A) The total operating time of each you. units other than those in Table 8 of this affected source during the reporting (b) Unless the Administrator has subpart. Alternatively, you may make period. approved a different schedule for these requests according to § 63.8(f). (B) Information on the number, submission of reports under § 63.10(a), (2) Descriptions of daily or per batch duration, and cause of deviations you must submit each report by the date demonstrations to verify that control (including unknown cause, if
VerDate 11
applicable), as applicable, and the exchange systems, you must include the to satisfy any obligation to report the corrective action taken. information in § 63.104(f)(2)(i) through same deviations in the semiannual (C) Operating logs and operating (iv) in your next compliance report. If monitoring report. However, submission scenarios. the leak remains unrepaired, you must of a Compliance report shall not (iii) For each deviation from an also submit the information in each otherwise affect any obligation the emission limitation (emission limits and subsequent compliance report until the affected source may have to report operating limits) occurring at an affected repair of the leak is reported. deviations from permit requirements to source where you are using a CMS to (8) Include the information in the permit authority. comply with the emission limit in this paragraphs (d)(8)(i) through (iii) of this subpart, you must include the section, as applicable, for storage tanks § 63.2525 What records must I keep? information in paragraphs (d)(5)(iii)(A) subject to the emission limitations and (a) You must keep the records through (N) of this section. This work practice standards in Table 4 of specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through includes periods of startup, shutdown, this subpart. (11) of this section. and malfunction. (i) For each storage tank subject to (1) A copy of each notification and (A) The date and time that each control requirements, include periods of report that you submitted to comply malfunction started and stopped. planned routine maintenance during with this subpart, including all (B) The date and time that each CMS which the control device does not documentation supporting any Initial was inoperative, except for zero (low- comply with the emission limitation in Notification or Notification of level) and high-level checks. Table 4 of this subpart. Compliance Status that you submitted, (C) The date, time, and duration that (ii) For each storage tank controlled according to the requirements in each CEMS was out-of-control, with a floating roof, include a copy of § 63.10(b)(2)(xiv). including the information in the inspection record (required in (2) The records in § 63.6(e)(3)(iii) § 63.8(c)(8). § 63.1065) when inspection failures through (v) related to startup, shutdown, (D) The date and time that each occur. and malfunction. deviation started and stopped, and (iii) If you elect to use an extension (3) Records of performance tests and whether each deviation occurred during for a floating roof inspection in performance evaluations as required in a period of startup, shutdown, or accordance with § 63.1063(c)(2)(iv)(B) or § 63.10(b)(2)(viii). malfunction or during another period. (e)(2), include the documentation (4) Records specified in § 63.1038(b) (E) A summary of the total duration of required by § 63.1063 (c)(2)(iv)(B) or and (c) for equipment subject to the the deviation during the reporting (e)(2). work practice standards for equipment period, and the total duration as a (9) Include each new operating leaks in Table 5 of this subpart. percent of the total source operating scenario which has been operated since (5) Daily schedule or log of each time during that reporting period. the time period covered by the last operating scenario. (F) A breakdown of the total duration compliance report. For each new (6) The information specified in of the deviations during the reporting operating scenario, you must provide paragraphs (a)(6)(i) and (ii) for batch period into those that are due to startup, verification that the operating processes in compliance with a percent shutdown, control equipment problems, conditions for any associated control or reduction emission limit in Table 2 of process problems, other known causes, treatment device have not been this subpart and containing process and other unknown causes. exceeded and that any required vents controlled to less the percent (G) A summary of the total duration calculations and engineering analyses reduction requirement. of CMS downtime during the reporting have been performed. For the initial (i) Records of whether each batch period, and the total duration of CMS compliance report, each operating operated was considered a standard downtime as a percent of the total scenario operated since the compliance batch. (ii) The actual uncontrolled and source operating time during that date must be submitted. reporting period. (10) Include the information specified controlled emissions for each batch that (H) An identification of each in § 63.1039(b)(1) through (8) for is considered to be a nonstandard batch. (7) The information specified in hazardous air pollutant that was processes subject to the work practice paragraphs (a)(7)(i) through (iv) of this monitored at the affected source. standards for equipment leaks in Table (I) A brief description of the process section for each batch process with 5 of this subpart. units. (e) Each affected source that has uncontrolled HAP emissions less than (J) A brief description of the CMS. obtained a title V operating permit 10,000 lb/yr. (K) The date of the latest CMS (i) A record of the number of batches pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 71 must certification or audit. per year. (L) A description of any changes in report all deviations as defined in this (ii) A record of whether each batch CMS, processes, or controls since the subpart in the semiannual monitoring operated was considered a standard last reporting period. report required by 40 CFR batch. (M) Operating logs and operating 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR (iii) The actual uncontrolled and scenarios. 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A). If an affected source controlled emissions for each batch that (N) The operating day or operating submits a Compliance report pursuant is considered to be a nonstandard batch. block average values of monitored to Table 20 of this subpart along with, (iv) Records of the daily 365-day parameters. or as part of, the semiannual monitoring rolling summations of emissions. (6) If there were no periods during report required by 40 CFR (8) Records of planned routine which the CMS (including CEMS and 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR maintenance for control devices used to CPMS) was out-of-control as specified 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), and the Compliance comply with the percent reduction in § 63.8(c)(7), include a statement that report includes all required information emission limitations for storage tanks in there were no periods during which the concerning deviations from any Table 4 of this subpart. CMS was out-of-control during the emission limitation (including any (9) The maintenance wastewater plan reporting period. operating limit), or work practice required in Table 12 of this subpart. (7) If you invoke the delay of repair standard in this subpart, submission of (10) A record of each time a safety provisions in § 63.104(e) for heat the Compliance report shall be deemed device is opened to avoid unsafe
VerDate 11
conditions in accordance with in § 63.2445, if a control device that you Notification of Compliance Status § 63.2450(c). use to comply with this subpart is also required by § 63.2520 which storage (11) Records of the results of each subject to monitoring, recordkeeping, tanks are in compliance with 40 CFR CPMS calibration, validation check, and and reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb. inspection required by § 63.2475(c)(6) part 264, subpart AA, BB, or CC; or the (d) Compliance with subpart I of this through (8), (d)(4) and (5), (e)(4) through monitoring and recordkeeping part. After the compliance dates (7), and (f)(3) and (4). requirements in 40 CFR part 265, specified in § 63.2445, if you have an (b) For each CEMS, you must keep the subpart AA, BB, or CC; and you comply affected source with equipment subject records specified in paragraphs (b)(1) with the periodic reporting to subpart I of this part, you may elect through (4) of this section. requirements under 40 CFR part 264, to comply with either the provisions of (1) Records described in subpart AA, BB, or CC that would apply this subpart FFFF or the provisions of § 63.10(b)(2)(vi) through (xi). to the device if your facility had final- subpart H of this part for all such (2) Previous (i.e., superseded) permitted status, you may elect to equipment. You must identify in the versions of the performance evaluation comply either with the monitoring, Notification of Compliance Status plan as required in § 63.8(d)(3). recordkeeping, and reporting required by § 63.2520 the provisions (3) Request for alternatives to relative requirements of this subpart; or with the with which you will comply. accuracy test for CEMS as required in monitoring and recordkeeping (e) Compliance with subpart GGG of § 63.8(f)(6)(i). requirements in 40 CFR part 264 or 265 this part for equipment leaks. After the (4) Records of the date and time that and the reporting requirements in 40 compliance dates specified in § 63.2445, each deviation started and stopped, and CFR part 264, as described in this if you have an affected source subject to whether the deviation occurred during a paragraph, which constitute compliance this subpart and you have an affected period of startup, shutdown, or with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and source with equipment subject to malfunction or during another period. reporting requirements of this subpart. If § 63.1255, you may elect to comply with (c) You must keep the records you elect to comply with the the provisions of this subpart FFFF for required in Tables 17, 18, and 19 of this monitoring, recordkeeping, and all such equipment. You must identify subpart to show continuous compliance reporting requirements in 40 CFR parts in the Notification of Compliance Status with each emission limitation and work 264 and/or 265, you must report the required by § 63.2520 the provisions practice standard that applies to you. information described in § 63.2520, and with which you will comply. you must identify in the Notification of (f) Compliance with subpart MMM of § 63.2530 In what form and how long must this part for equipment leaks. After the I keep my records? Compliance Status required by § 63.2520 the monitoring, compliance dates specified in § 63.2445, (a) Your records must be in a form recordkeeping, and reporting authority if you have an affected source subject to suitable and readily available for under which you will comply. this subpart and you have an affected expeditious review according to (2) After the compliance dates source with equipment subject to § 63.10(b)(1). specified in § 63.2445, if you have an § 63.1363, you may elect to comply with (b) As specified in § 63.10(b)(1), you affected source with equipment that is the provisions of this subpart FFFF for must keep each record for 5 years also subject to 40 CFR part 264, subpart all such equipment. You must identify following the date of each occurrence, BB or to 40 CFR part 265, subpart BB, in the Notification of Compliance Status measurement, maintenance, corrective then compliance with the recordkeeping required by § 63.2520 the provisions action, report, or record. and reporting requirements of 40 CFR with which you will comply. (c) You must keep each record on site part 264 and/or 265 may be used to (g) Compliance with subpart GGG of for at least 2 years after the date of each comply with the recordkeeping and this part for wastewater. After the occurrence, measurement, maintenance, reporting requirements of this subpart, compliance dates specified in § 63.2445, corrective action, report, or record to the extent that the requirements of 40 if you have an affected source subject to according to § 63.10(b)(1). You can keep CFR part 264 and/or 265 duplicate the this subpart and you have an affected the records offsite for the remaining 3 requirements of this subpart. You must source that generates wastewater years. identify in the Notification of streams subject to § 63.1256, you may Other Requirements and Information Compliance Status required by elect to comply with the provisions of § 63.2520 if you will comply with the this subpart FFFF for all such § 63.2535 What compliance options do I recordkeeping and reporting authority wastewater streams. You must identify have if part of my plant is subject to both under 40 CFR part 264 and/or 265. in the Notification of Compliance Status this subpart and another subpart? (c) Compliance with 40 CFR part 60, required by § 63.2520 the provisions (a) Compliance with other subparts of subpart Kb. After the compliance dates with which you will comply. this part. If you have an MCPU that is specified in § 63.2445, you are in (h) Compliance with subpart MMM of a batch process vent that is part of a compliance with the provisions of this this part for wastewater. After the CMPU as defined in subparts F and G subpart FFFF for any storage tank that compliance dates specified in § 63.2445, of this part, you must comply with the is assigned to an MCPU and that is both if you have an affected source subject to emission limitations; work practice controlled with a floating roof and in this subpart, and you have an affected standards; and the compliance, compliance with the provisions of 40 source that generates wastewater monitoring, reporting and CFR part 60, subpart Kb. You are in streams subject to § 63.1362(d), you may recordkeeping requirements for batch compliance with this subpart FFFF if elect to comply with the provisions of process vents in this subpart FFFF, and you have a storage tank with a fixed this subpart FFFF for all such you must continue to comply with the roof, closed-vent system, and control wastewater streams (except that the 99 requirements in subparts F, G, and H of device in compliance with the percent reduction requirement for this part that are applicable to the provisions of 40 CFR part 60, subpart streams subject to § 63.1362(d)(10) still CMPU and associated equipment. Kb, except that you must comply with applies). You must identify in the (b) Compliance with 40 CFR parts 264 the monitoring, recordkeeping, and Notification of Compliance Status and 265, subparts AA, BB, and/or CC. reporting requirements in this subpart required by § 63.2520 the provisions (1) After the compliance dates specified FFFF. You must also identify in your with which you will comply.
VerDate 11
(i) Compliance with other regulations § 63.2545 Who implements and enforces vapor service, in heavy liquid service, in for wastewater. After the compliance this subpart? light liquid service, in liquid service, in dates specified in § 63.2445, if you have (a) This subpart can be implemented organic HAP service, in vacuum service, an affected wastewater stream that is and enforced by us, the US EPA, or a instrumentation system, liquids also subject to provisions in 40 CFR delegated authority such as your State, dripping, nonrepairable, open-ended parts 260 through 272, you may elect to local, or tribal agency. If the US EPA valve or line, pressure relief device or determine whether this subpart or 40 Administrator has delegated authority to valve, repaired, and screwed (threaded) CFR parts 260 through 272 contain the your State, local, or tribal agency, then connector. more stringent control requirements that agency has the authority to (d) The following terms used in this (e.g., design, operation, and inspection implement and enforce this subpart. subpart and in referenced subparts are You should contact your US EPA requirements for waste management defined in § 63.1601: external floating Regional Office to find out if this units; numerical treatment standards; roof (EFR), flexible fabric sleeve seal, subpart is delegated to your State, local, etc.) and the more stringent testing, floating roof, initial fill or initial filling, or tribal agency. internal floating roof (IFR), liquid- monitoring, recordkeeping, and (b) In delegating implementation and mounted seal, mechanical shoe seal or reporting requirements. Compliance enforcement authority of this subpart to metallic shoe, and vapor-mounted seal. with provisions of 40 CFR parts 260 a State, local, or tribal agency under (e) The following terms used in this through 272 that are determined to be section 40 CFR part 63, subpart E, the subpart and in referenced subparts are more stringent than the requirements of authorities contained in paragraph (c) of defined in § 63.1251: actual HAP this subpart constitute compliance with this section are retained by the emissions, air pollution control device this subpart. For example, provisions of Administrator of US EPA and are not (or control device), batch emission 40 CFR parts 260 through 272 for delegated to the State, local, or tribal episode, batch operation or batch treatment units that meet the conditions agency. process, block, cleaning operation, specified in § 63.138(h) constitute (c) The authorities that will not be consumption, fixed roof, hydrogen compliance with this subpart. In the delegated to State, local, or tribal halides and halogens, nondedicated Notification of Compliance Status agencies are as follows: formulation, process condenser, required by § 63.2520, you must identify (1) Approval of alternatives to the production-indexed HAP consumption the more stringent provisions of 40 CFR non-opacity emission limitations and factor, production-indexed VOC parts 260 through 272 with which you work practice standards in § 63.2450(a) consumption factor, total organic will comply. You must also identify in under § 63.6(g). compounds (TOC), uncontrolled HAP the Notification of Compliance Status (2) Approval of major alternatives to emissions, and unit operation. test methods under § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and required by § 63.2520 the information (f) All terms used in this subpart that (f) and as defined in § 63.90. and procedures that you used to make are not listed in paragraphs (a) through (3) Approval of major alternatives to (e) of this section are defined in the any stringency determinations. If you do monitoring under § 63.8(f) and as not elect to determine the more CAA, in 40 CFR 63.2, the General defined in § 63.90. Provisions of this part, and in this stringent requirements, you must (4) Approval of major alternatives to section as follows: comply with both the provisions of 40 recordkeeping and reporting under Bulk loading means the loading, into CFR parts 260 through 272 and the § 63.10(f) and as defined in § 63.90. provisions of this subpart. a tank truck or rail car, of liquid § 63.2550 What definitions apply to this products or isolated intermediates that (j) Compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart? are materials described in § 63.2435(b) subparts III, NNN, and RRR. After the (a) The following terms used in this and that contain one or more of the compliance dates specified in § 63.2445, subpart and in referenced subparts are organic HAP, as defined in section 112 if you have an MCPU that contains defined in § 63.101: heat exchange of the CAA, from a loading rack. A equipment subject to the provisions of system, and maintenance wastewater. loading rack is the system used to fill this subpart that are also subject to the (b) The following terms used in this tank trucks and railcars at a single provisions of 40 CFR part 60, subpart III, subpart and in referenced subparts are geographic site. NNN, or RRR, you may elect to apply defined in § 63.111: annual average Closed biological treatment process this subpart to all such equipment in the concentration, annual average flow rate, means a tank or surface impoundment MCPU. If you elect this method of automated monitoring and recording where biological treatment occurs and compliance, you must consider all total system, boiler, car-seal, closed-vent air emissions from the treatment process organic compounds, minus methane system, combustion device, container, are routed to a control device by means and ethane, in such equipment for cover, duct work, enhanced biological of a closed-vent system or by means of purposes of applicability and treatment system, flow indicator, hard-piping. The tank or surface compliance with this subpart, as if they halogenated vent stream, hard-piping, impoundment has a fixed roof, as were organic HAP. Compliance with the individual drain system, junction box, defined in § 63.1251, or a floating provisions of this subpart, in the oil-water separator, point of flexible membrane cover that meets the manner described in this paragraph, determination, primary fuel, process requirements specified in § 63.134. will constitute compliance with 40 CFR heater, residual, sewer line, surface Construction means the onsite part 60, subpart III, NNN, or RRR, as impoundment, Table 8 compound, fabrication, erection, or installation of applicable. Table 9 compound, total resource an affected source or MCPU. Addition of effectiveness (TRE) index value, new equipment to an MCPU subject to § 63.2540 What parts of the General treatment process, wastewater tank, and existing source standards does not Provisions apply to me? water seal controls. constitute construction, but it may (c) The following terms used in this constitute reconstruction of the affected Table 21 of this subpart shows which subpart and in referenced subparts are source or MCPU if it satisfies the parts of the General Provisions in defined in § 63.1020: connector, double definition of reconstruction in § 63.2440 §§ 63.1 through 63.15 apply to you. block and bleed system, in gas and (f) or (g).
VerDate 11
Consumption means the quantity of totes, day tanks, and storage tanks. The processing of raw materials or the all HAP raw materials entering a process storage of an isolated intermediate manufacturing of a product or isolated in excess of the theoretical amount used marks the end of a process. intermediate. as reactant, assuming 100 percent Large control device means a control Mixing means an operation in which stoichiometric conversion. The raw device that controls total HAP emissions a material is combined with one or more materials include reactants, solvents, of greater than or equal to 10 tons/yr, materials at ambient temperature and any other additives. If a HAP is before control. without a chemical reaction. generated in the process as well as Maintenance wastewater means Nondedicated solvent recovery means added as a raw material, consumption wastewater generated by the draining of a recovery device that receives material includes the quantity generated in the process fluid from components in the from more than one MCPU. process. MCPU into an individual drain system On-site or on site means, with respect Dedicated MCPU means an MCPU in preparation for or during to records required to be maintained by that is composed of equipment that is maintenance activities. Maintenance this subpart or required by another used to manufacture the same product wastewater can be generated during subpart referenced by this subpart, that for a continuous period of 6 months or planned and unplanned shutdowns and records are stored at a location within greater. The MCPU includes any shared during periods not associated with a a major source which encompasses the storage tanks that are determined to shutdown. Examples of activities that affected source. On-site includes, but is belong to the MCPU according to the can generate maintenance wastewater not limited to, storage at the affected procedures in § 63.2440(c). include descaling of heat exchanger source or MCPU to which the records Dense gas system means a conveyance tubing bundles, cleaning of distillation pertain, or storage in central files system operated to limit oxygen levels column traps, draining of pumps into an elsewhere at the major source. below 12 percent. individual drain system, and draining of Open biological treatment process Deviation means any instance in portions of the MCPU for repair. means a biological treatment process which an affected source subject to this Wastewater from cleaning operations is that is not a closed biological treatment not considered maintenance subpart, or an owner or operator of such process as defined in this section. wastewater. a source: Operating scenario means, for the (1) fails to meet any requirement or Miscellaneous organic chemical purposes of reporting and obligation established by this subpart, manufacturing process means all recordkeeping, any specific operation of including but not limited to any equipment which collectively function an MCPU and includes for each process: emission limitation (including any to produce a product or isolated (1) A description of the process and operating limit) or work practice intermediate that are materials the type of process equipment used; standard; described in § 63.2435(b). A process (2) fails to meet any term or condition may consist of one or more unit (2) An identification of related that is adopted to implement an operations. For the purposes of this process vents and their associated applicable requirement in this subpart subpart, process includes any, all or a emissions episodes and durations, and that is included in the operating combination of reaction, recovery, wastewater point of determination permit for any affected source required separation, purification, or other (POD), and storage tanks; to obtain such a permit; or activity, operation, manufacture, or (3) The applicable control (3) fails to meet any emission treatment which are used to produce a requirements of this subpart, including limitation (including any operating product or isolated intermediate. the level of required control, and for limit) or work practice standard in this Cleaning operations conducted are vents, the level of control for each vent; subpart during startup, shutdown, or considered part of the process. (4) The control or treatment devices malfunction, regardless or whether or Nondedicated solvent recovery used, as applicable, including a not such failure is permitted by this operations located within a contiguous description of operating and/or testing subpart. area within the affected source are conditions for any associated control Emission limitation means any considered single processes. A storage device; emission limit or operating limit. tank that is used to accumulate used (5) The process vents, wastewater Family of materials means grouping solvent from multiple batches of a single POD, and storage tanks (including those of materials with the same basic process for purposes of solvent recovery from other processes) that are composition produced using the same does not represent the end of the simultaneously routed to the control or basic feedstocks, but that may vary, for process. Nondedicated formulation treatment device(s); example, by molecular weight, operations (not including mixing, as (6) The applicable monitoring functional group, or manufacturing defined in this section) occurring within requirements of this subpart and any equipment configuration. Examples of a contiguous area are considered a parametric level that assures families of materials include, but are not single process that is used to formulate compliance for all emissions routed to limited to, alkyd resins, polyester resins, numerous materials and/or products. the control or treatment device; and synthetic fatty acids. Quality assurance and quality control (7) Calculations and engineering Isolated intermediate is obtained as laboratories are not considered part of analyses required to demonstrate the product of a process. An isolated any process. Ancillary activities are not compliance; and intermediate is usually a product of a considered a process or part of any (8) For reporting purposes, a change chemical synthesis, fermentation, or process. Ancillary activities include to any of these elements not previously biological extraction process; several boilers and incinerators (not used to reported, except for paragraph (5) of this different isolated intermediates may be comply with the emission limitations in definition, constitutes a new operating produced in the manufacture of a Tables 1 through 4 of this subpart), scenario. product. An isolated intermediate is chillers and refrigeration systems, and Predominant HAP means as used in stored before subsequent processing. other equipment and activities that are calibrating an analyzer, the single Storage occurs at any time the not directly involved (i.e., they operate organic HAP that constitutes the largest intermediate is placed in equipment within a closed system and materials are percentage of the total HAP in the used solely for storage, such as drums, not combined with process fluids) in the analyzed gas stream, by volume.
VerDate 11
Process vent means a vent from a unit vessels. Shutdown does not apply to (4) Wastewater storage tanks; and operation or vents from multiple unit cessation of a batch process at the end (5) Process tanks (including product operations within a process that are of a campaign, for routine maintenance, tanks and isolated intermediate tanks). manifolded together into a common for rinsing or washing of equipment Supplemental gases are any gaseous header, through which a HAP- between batches, or other routine streams that are not defined as process containing gas stream is, or has the operations. ents, or closed-vent systems from Small control device means a control potential to be, released to the wastewater management and treatment device that controls total HAP emissions atmosphere. Examples of process vents units, storage tanks, or equipment include, but are not limited to, vents on of less than 10 tons/yr, before control. components and that contain less than condensers used for product recovery, Standard batch means a batch process 50 ppmv TOC, as determined through bottom receivers, surge control vessels, operated within a range of operating process knowledge, that are introduced reactors, filters, centrifuges, and process conditions that are documented in an into vent streams or manifolds. Air tanks. Emission streams that are operating scenario. Emissions from a required to operate combustion device undiluted and uncontrolled containing standard batch are based on the burner(s) is not considered less than 50 ppmv HAP, as determined operating conditions that result in supplemental gas. through process knowledge that no HAP highest emissions. The standard batch are present in the emission stream or defines the uncontrolled and controlled System flowrate means the flowrate of using an engineering assessment as emissions for each emission episode gas entering the control device. discussed in § 63.1257(d)(2)(ii), test data defined under the operating scenario. Total organic compounds or (TOC) using Methods 18 of 40 CFR part 60, Startup means the setting in operation means the total gaseous organic appendix A, or any other test method of a continuous process unit for any compounds (minus methane and that has been validated according to the purpose the first time a new or ethane) in a vent stream, with the procedures in Method 301 of appendix reconstructed batch process unit begins concentrations expressed on a carbon A of this part, are not considered production; or, for new equipment basis. process vents. Process vents do not added, including equipment used to Waste management unit means the include vents on storage tanks, comply with this subpart, the first time equipment, structure(s), and/or wastewater emission sources, or pieces the equipment is put into operation; or device(s) used to convey, store, treat, or of equipment subject to the emission for the introduction of a new product/ dispose of wastewater streams or limitations and work practice standards process, the first time the product or residuals. Examples of waste in Tables 3 through 5 of this subpart. process is run in equipment. For batch management units include wastewater Recovery device means an individual process units, startup does not apply to tanks, air flotation units, surface unit of equipment used for the purpose the first time the equipment is put into impoundments, containers, oil-water or of recovering chemicals from process operation at the start of a campaign to organic-water separators, individual vent streams for reuse in a process at the produce a product that has been drain systems, biological wastewater affected source and from wastewater produced in the past, after a shutdown treatment units, waste incinerators, and streams for fuel value (i.e., net positive for maintenance, or when the organic removal devices such as steam heating value), use, reuse, or for sale for equipment is put into operation as part and air stripper units, and thin film fuel value, use or reuse. Examples of of a batch within a campaign. For evaporation units. If such equipment is equipment that may be recovery devices equipment subject to the work practice used for recovery, then it is part of a include absorbers, carbon adsorbers, standards in Table 5 of this subpart, miscellaneous organic chemical condensers, oil-water separators or startup means the setting in operation of manufacturing process and is not a organic-water separators, or organic a piece of equipment or a control device waste management unit. removal devices such as decanters, that is subject to this subpart. strippers, or thin-film evaporation units. Storage tank means a tank or other Wastewater stream means water that To be a recovery device for a wastewater vessel that is used to store organic is discarded from an MCPU through a stream, a decanter and any other liquids that contain one or more HAP as single POD and that contains either: an equipment based on the operating raw material feedstocks. Storage tank annual average concentration of Table 9 principle of gravity separation must also means a tank or other vessel in a compounds (as defined in § 63.111) of at receive only two-phase liquid streams. tank farm that receives and accumulates least 5 ppmw and has an annual average Responsible official means used solvent from multiple batches of a flow rate of 0.02 liters per minute or responsible official as defined in 40 CFR process or processes for purposes of greater, or an annual average 70.2. solvent recovery. The following are not concentration of Table 9 compounds (as Shutdown means the cessation of considered storage tanks for the defined in § 63.111) of at least 10,000 operation of a continuous process for purposes of this subpart: ppmw at any flow rate. For the purposes any purpose. Shutdown also means the (1) Vessels permanently attached to of this subpart, noncontact cooling cessation of a batch process or any motor vehicles such as trucks, railcars, water is not considered a wastewater related individual piece of equipment barges, or ships; stream. required or used to comply with this (2) Pressure vessels designed to Work practice standard means any subpart as a result of a malfunction or operate in excess of 204.9 kilopascals design, equipment, work practice, or for replacement of equipment, repair, or and without emissions to the operational standard, or combination any other purpose not excluded from atmosphere; thereof, that is promulgated pursuant to this definition. Shutdown also applies (3) Vessels storing organic liquids that section 112(h) of the Clean Air Act to emptying and degassing storage contain HAP only as impurities; (CAA).
Tables to Subpart FFFF of Part 63 As required in §§ 63.2450(a)(1) and (f), 63.2460(a)(2), and 63.2500(b)(1), you must meet each emission limitation and work practice standard in the following table that applies to your continuous process vents:
VerDate 11
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART FFFF.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR CONTINUOUS PROCESS VENTS
For * * * You must * * * And you must * * *
1. Each continuous process vent with a TRE: Use a control device to reduce HAP emis- Route the vent stream to the control device ≤2.6 at an existing source; or ≤5.0 at a new sions by ≥98 percent by weight; or use a through a closed-vent system; and comply or reconstructed source. control device to reduce emissions to an with the work practice standards for closed- outlet total organic HAP or TOC vent systems specified in Table 5 of this concentraiton ≤20 ppmv and an outlet hy- subpart; and comply with the emission limi- drogen halide and halogen concentration tations in Table 7 of this subpart, if you use ≤ppmv, both corrected for supplemental a combustion device to control halogenated gases as specified in § 63.2470(g); or re- vent streams. Determine whether a vent duce HAP emissions using a flare that stream is halogenated according to meets the performance requirements speci- § 63.2460(b). fied in § 63.11(b), but you may not use a flare for halogenated vent streams; or re- duce HPA emissions using a control device specified in § 63.2455(f); or achieve and maintain a TRE index value >2.6 for exist- ing sources and 5.0 for new sources at the outlet of the final recovery device, or prior to release of the vent streasm to the atmos- phere if no recovery device is present. 2. Each continuous process vent with a TRE Maintain the TRE >2.6 at the outlet of the Non applicable. >2.6 but ≤5.0 at an existing source. final recovery device, or prior to release of the vent stream to the atmosphere if no re- covery device is present. 3. Each continuous process vent with a TRE Maintain the TRE >5.0 at the outlet of the Non applicable >5.0 but ≤8.0 at a new or reconstructed final recovery device, or prior to release of source. the vent stream to the atmosphere if no re- covery device is present.
As required in §§ 63.2450(a)(2) and (f), 63.2495(b), 63.2500(b)(1), and 63.2505(a)(4), you must meet each emission limitation and work practice standard in the following table that applies to your batch process vents:
TABLE 2 TO SUBPART FFFF.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR BATCH PROCESS VENTS
For * * * You must * * * And you must * * *
1. The sum of all batch process vents within a Maintain annual emissions below the applica- Non applicable. process if the total uncontrolled HAP emis- ble mass limits. sion are <10,000 lb/yr at an existing source; or <3,000 lb/yr at a new or reconstruced source. 2. The sum of all batch process vents within a Reduce HAP emissions from the sum of all For each vent stream that you control, route process with uncontrolled total HAP emis- batch process vents within the process by the vent stream through a closed-vent sys- sions ≥10,000 lb/yr at an existing source; or ≥98 percent by weight; or reduce HAP tem to the control device; and comply with ≥3,000 lb/yr at a new or reconstructed source. emissions from the sum of all batch proc- the work practice standards for closed-vent ess vents within the process by ≥95 percent systems specified in Table 5 of this subpart; by weight using recovery devices; or control and comply with the emission limitations in emissions from any batch vents within the Table 7 of this subpart, if you use a com- process in accordance with any combina- bustion device to control halogenated vent tion of the following, and reduce HAP emis- streams. Determine whether a vent stream sions from the sum of all the remaining is halogenated according to § 63.2460(b). batch vents within the process by ≥98 per- cent by weight: reduce HAP emissions using a flare that meets the performance requiremetns specified in § 63.11(b), but you may not use a flare for halogenated vent streams; or reduce emissions to an outlet total organic HAP or TOC concentra- tion ≤20 ppmv and an outlet hydrogen ha- lide and halogen concentration ≤20 ppmv, both corrected for supplemental gases as specified in § 63.2470(g); or reduce HAP emissions using a control device specified in § 63.2455(f).
As required in §§ 63.2450(a)(3) and (f), 63.2460(c), 63.2495(b), and 63.2500(b)(1), you must meet each emission limitation and work practice standard in the following table that applies to your wastewater streams, waste management units, and liquid streams in open systems within an MCPU:
VerDate 11
TABLE 3 TO SUBPART FFFF.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER STREAMS, WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS, AND LIQUID STREAMS IN OPEN SYSTEMS WITHIN AN MCPU
According to the following For each * * * You must * * * additional options and exceptions * * *
1. Waste management unit (i.e., wastewater Suppress HAP emissions by complying with For any halogenated streams that are con- tank, surface impoundment container, indi- the requirements specified in trolled with a combustion device, also com- vidual drain system, and oil-water separator) §§ 63.132(a)(2)(i) and 63.133 through ply with the emission limitations in Table 7 used to convey, store, treat, or dispose of an 63.137; and route vent streams from the of this subpart. Determine whether a vent affected wastewater stream or residual. waste management units through a closed- stream is halogenated according to vent system to any of the following: A flare § 63.2460(b); and you must correct outlet that meets the performance requirements of concentrations to account for supplemental § 63.11(b), except that you may not vent a gases using the procedures specified in halogenated vent stream to a flare, or a § 63.2470(g); and you may not comply with control device that reduces HAP emissions the outlet concentration standard for sur- by ≥95 percent by weight; or a control de- face impoundments and containers. vice that reduces emissions to an outlet total organic HAP or TOC concentration ≥20 ppmv; or a combustion device with a minimum residence time of 0.5 seconds at a minimum temperature of 760°C; or a con- trol device specified in § 63.2455(f); and comply with the work practice standards for closed-vent systems specified in Table 5 of this subpart. 2. Affected wastewater stream at an existing Treat the wastewater to remove or destroy The treatment options may be used in com- source. HAP compounds listed in Table 9 of sub- bination for different wastewater streams part G using one of the options specified in and/or for different compounds in the same § 63.138(b)(1), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), or (i). wastewater streams, except where other- wise provided in § 63.138; you may use a series of treatment processes in accord- ance with the provisions in § 63.138(a)(7); and you need not cover and vent an open biological treatment process to a control de- vice. 3. Affected wastewater stream at a new or re- Treat the wastewater to remove or destroy The treatment options may be used in com- constructed source. HAP compounds listed in Table 9 of sub- bination for different wastewater streams part G using one of the options specified in and/or for different compounds in the same § 63.138(b)(1), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), or (i); wastewater streams, except where other- and treat the wastewater to remove or de- wise provided in § 63.138; and you may use stroy HAP compounds listed in Table 8 of a series of treatment processes in accord- subpart G using one of the options speci- ance with the provisions in § 63.138(a)(7); fied in § 63.138(c)(1), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), or and you need not cover and vent an open (i). biological treatment process to a control de- vice. 4. Residual removed from an affected waste- Control HAP emissions by complying with the Non applicable. water stream. requirements in entry 1. of this table and in § 63.138(k). 5. Maintenance wastewater containing HAP list- Develop and implement a maintenance Non applicable. ed in Table 9 of subpart G of this part. wastewater plan according to § 63.105. 6. Liquid stream in an open system within an Comply with the requirements in § 63.149, ex- Non applicable. MCPU. cept: references in § 63.149 to a ‘‘chemical manufacturing process unit’’ means an ‘‘MCPU as defined in § 63.2435(b)’’ for the purposes of this subpart; and references to § 63.100(f) and references to subparts F, G, and H of this part do not apply for the pur- poses of this subpart; and when § 63.149 refers to the definition of new sources in 40 CFR 63.100(l)(1) or (2), the definitions for new and reconstructed sources in § 63.2440 apply for the purposes of this subpart; and references in § 63.149 to fuel gas systems do not apply for the purposes of this subpart; and when Table 35 of sub- part G refers to § 63.139(c), references to entry d. in this table apply for the purposes of this subpart.
As required in §§ 63.2450(a)(4), (f), and (i), 63.2495(b), and 63.2500(b)(1) and (c)(1)(vi), you must meet each emission limitation and work practice standard in the following table that applies to your storage tanks:
VerDate 11
TABLE 4 TO SUBPART FFFF.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR STORAGE TANKS
For each * * * You must * * * And you must * * *
Storage tank with a capacity ≥10,000 gal stor- Route emissions through a closed-vent sys- Comply with the work practice standards for ing material that has a maximum true vapor tem to either: a control device that reduces closed-vent systems specified in Table 5 of pressure of total HAP: ≥1.0 psia at an exist- HAP emissions by ≥95 percent by weight; this subpart. ing source; or ≥0.1 psia at a new or recon- or a control device that reduces emissions structed source. to an outlet total organic HAP or TOC con- centration less than or equal to 20 ppmv and an outlet hydrogen halide and halogen concentration less than or equal to 20 ppmv, or a flare that meets the perform- ance requirements specified in § 63.11(b); or a control device specified in § 63.2455(f); or operate and maintain either an internal floating roof or an external floating roof de- signed, operated, inspected, and repaired as specified in § 63.1063(a) through (e); or vapor balance according to § 63.1253(f), ex- cept that: the references to §§ 63.1255(g)(4)(i) through (iv), 63.1257(c), 63.1258, § 63.1259, and 63.1260 refer to § 63.1024(f)(1) through (3), Table 14 of this subpart, Table 19 of this subpart, § 63.2525, and § 63.2520, respectively; and the 90 percent control requirement in § 63.1253(f)(6)(i) means 95 percent for the purposes of this subpart.
As required in §§ 63.2450(a)(5) and (f), 63.2495(b), and 63.2505(a)(3), you must meet each work practice standard in the following table that applies to your equipment leaks, closed-vent systems, and heat exchange systems:
TABLE 5 TO SUBPART FFFF OF PART 63.—WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR EQUIPMENT LEAKS, CLOSED-VENT SYSTEMS, AND HEAT EXCHANGE SYSTEMS
For each * * * You must * * *
1. Piece of equipment that is in organic HAP service and is not de- Comply with the provisions in §§ 63.1022 and 63.1024 through 63.1037 scribed in § 63.1019(c) through (e). (except § 63.1022(b)(5)). 2. Piece of equipment that is in organic HAP service <300 hr/yr ...... Identify the equipment as specified in § 63.1022(b)(5). 3. Closed-vent system that is used to route emissions to a control de- Conduct annual inspections, repair leaks, and maintain records as vice that is used to comply with an emission limitation or work prac- specified in § 63.983(b), (c), and (d). tice standard in Tables 1 through 4 or 6 of this subpart. 4. Closed-vent system that contains a bypas line that could divert a Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a flow indicator that determines vent stream away from a control device used to comply with an whether vent stream flow is present. The flow indicator must be in- emission limitation or work practice standard in Tables 1 through 4 stalled at the entrance to any bypass line that could divert the vent and 6 of this subpart, except equipment such as low-leg drains, high stream away from the control device to the atmosphere, and it must bleed points, analyzer vents, open-ended valves or lines, rupture indicate either the presence of flow or lack of flow at least once disks, and pressure relief valves needed for safety purposes. every 15 minutes; or secure the bypass line valve in the closed posi- tion with a car seal or lock and key configuration. You must visually inspect the seal or closure mechanism at least once every month to ensure that the valve is maintained in the closed position and the vent stream is not diverted through the bypass line. 5. Heat exchange system that cools process equipment or materials in Monitor and repair the heat exchange system according to § 63.104(a) an MCPU. through (e), except that references in § 63.104 to ‘‘chemical manu- facturing process units’’ mean or materials in ‘‘MCPU’’ for the pur- poses of this subpart, and references an MCPU to § 63.100 do not apply for the purposes of this subpart.
As required in § 63.2450(a)(6) and (f), you must meet each emission limitation and work practice standard in the following table that applies to your transfer operations:
VerDate 11
TABLE 6 TO SUBPART FFFF.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR TRANSFER OPERATIONS
For each*** You must*** And you must***
Transfer operation for bulk loading of product or Use a vapor balancing system designed and Design and operate each vapor collection isolated intermediate with throughput ≥0.65 operated to collect displaced emissions and system such that HAP collected at one million liters/yr and a HAP partial pressure route them to: the storage tank from which loading arm will not pass through another ≥1.5 psia. the liquid being loaded originated; or an- loading arm to the atmosphere; and prevent other storage tank connected to a common pressure relief devices from opening during header, or compress and route to a process loading; and comply with work practice where the HAP in the emissions predomi- standards for closed-vent systems specified nantly meet one of, or a combination of, the in Table 5 of this subpart; and for any halo- following ends: recycled and or consumed genated streams that are controlled with a in the same manner as a material that ful- combustion device, you must also comply fills the same function in that process; with the emission limitations in Table 7 of transformed by chemical reaction into mate- this subpart; and vapor collection equip- rials that are not organic HAP, incorporated ment for tank trucks and railcars must be into a product; and/or recovered; or route compatible with the transfer operation’s emission stream through a closed-vent sys- vapor collection system. tem to: a control device that reduces HAP emissions by ≥98 percent by weight; or a control device that reduces emissions to outlet total organic HAP or TOC concentra- tions ≤20 ppmv and outlet hydrogen halide and halogen concentrations ≤20 ppmv, both corrected for supplemental gases as speci- fied in § 63.2470(g); or a flare that meets the performance requirements of § 63.11(b), except that you may not vent halogenated vent streams to a flare; or a control device specified in § 63.2455(f).
As required in §§ 63.2450(a)(7) and (f) and 63.2495(b), you must meet each emission limitation in the following table that applies to your halogenated vent streams that are controlled with a combustion device:
TABLE 7 TO SUBPART FFFF.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS FOR HALOGENATED VENT STREAMS THAT ARE CONTROLLED WITH A COMBUSTION DEVICE
For each*** You must***
1. Halogenated vent stream from a batch proc- Use a halogen reduction device after the combustion device to reduce hydrogen halides and ess vent, waste management unit, or transfer halogens by ≥95 percent by weight or to a concentration ≤20 ppmv; or use a halogen reduc- operation. tion device before the combustion device to reduce the halogen atom mass emission rate to a concentration ≤20 ppmv. 2. Halogenated vent stream from a continuous Use a halogen reduction device after the combustion device to reduce emissions of hydrogen process vent. halides and halogens by ≥99 percent by weight or to ≤0.45 kg/hr; or use a halogen reduc- tion device before the combustion device to reduce the halogen atom mass emission rate to ≤0.45 kg/hr.
As required in §§ 63.2450(e) and (f), 63.2480(b), 63.2500(c)(7), and 63.2505(a)(i)(c)(1), you must meet each operating limit in the following table that applies to your control devices, recovery devices, and wastewater treatment units:
TABLE 8 TO SUBPART FFFF.—OPERATING LIMITS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR CONTROL DEVICES, RECOVERY DEVICES, AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT UNITS
For each*** With inlet HAP levels*** You must***
1. Water scrubber ...... ≥1 ton/yr ...... Maintain the daily or block average scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure drop at or above the value established during the initial com- pliance determination. 2. Caustic scrubber ...... ≥1 ton/yr ...... Maintain the daily or block average scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure drop at or above the value established during the initial com- pliance determination; and maintain the daily average pH of the scrubber effluent at or above the value established during the initial compliance determination. 3. Condenser ...... ≥1 ton/yr ...... Maintain the daily or block average condenser outlet gas temperature at or below the value established during the initial compli- ance determination.
VerDate 11
TABLE 8 TO SUBPART FFFF.—OPERATING LIMITS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR CONTROL DEVICES, RECOVERY DEVICES, AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT UNITS—Continued
For each*** With inlet HAP levels*** You must***
4. Regenerative carbon adsorber ...... ≥1 ton/yr ...... For each regeneration cycle, maintain the re- generation frequency, temperature to which the bed is heated during regeneration, tem- perature to which the bed is cooled within 15 minutes of the completion of the cooling phase, and regeneration stream flow rate within the operating levels established dur- ing the initial compliance determination; and you conduct a check for bed poisoning in accordance with manufacturer’s specifica- tions at least once per year. 5. Thermal incinerator ...... ≥1 ton/yr ...... Maintain the daily or block average tempera- ture of gases exiting the combustion cham- ber at or above the value established dur- ing the initial compliance determination. 6. Catalytic incinerator ...... ≥1 ton/yr ...... Maintain the daily or block average tempera- ture of the gas stream immediately before the catalyst bed at or above the value es- tablished during the initial compliance deter- mination; and conduct an annual catalyst test, or, once per quarter, verify that the temperature difference across the catalyst bed under the same conditions as in the ini- tial compliance determination is no lower than 90 percent of the value established during the initial compliance determination. 7. Process heaters and boilers for which the ≥1 ton/yr ...... Maintain the daily or block average tempera- vent streams are not introduced with the pri- ture of the gases exiting the combustion mary fuel or the design heat input capacity is chamber at or above the value established ≤44 MW. during the initial compliance determination. 8. Any control or recovery device ...... <1 ton/yr ...... Follow the applicable procedures described in your precompliance report, according to § 63.2470(j), for demonstrating that the con- trol device is operating properly. 9. Design steam stripper ...... At any level ...... Maintain the daily or block average steam-to- wastewater ratio ≥0.04 kg/liter, wastewater feed temperature or column temperature ≤95°C, and wastewater loading ≤67,100 li- ters per hour per square meter. 10. Biological treatment unit ...... At any level ...... Maintain the TSS, BOD, and biomass con- centration established in your discharge permit. 11. Nonbiological wastewater treatment unit, At any level ...... Maintain the appropriate parameters within except for a design steam stripper. levels specified in your precompliance re- port and approved by the permitting author- ity.
As required in § 63.2470(c), you must conduct performance tests in accordance with the requirements in the following table:
TABLE 9 TO SUBPART FFFF.—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS
According to the following require- For each*** You must*** Using*** ments * * *
1. Vent stream ...... Select sampling port’s location Method 1 or 1A of 40 CFR part Sampling sites must be located at and the number of traverse 60, appendix A, § 63.7(d)(1)(i). the inlet (if emission reduction ports. or destruction efficiency testing is required) and outlet of the control device and prior to any releases to the atmosphere. 2. Vent stream ...... Determine velocity and volumetric Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G Non applicable. flow rate. of appendix A to part 60 of this chapter. 3. Vent stream...... Conduct gas molecular weight Method 3, 3A, or 3B in appendix Non applicable. analysis. A to part 60 of this chapter. 4. Vent stream ...... Measure moisture content of the Method 4 in appendix A to part 60 Non applicable. stack gas. of this chapter.
VerDate 11
TABLE 9 TO SUBPART FFFF.—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS—Continued
According to the following require- For each * * * You must* * * Using * * * ments * * *
5. Vent stream controlled in a non- a. Measure percent reduction of i. Method 18 in appendix A to part Measure inlet and outlet mass combustion device, except as organic HAP or TOC, or 60 of this chapter or ASTM emissions and calculate the specified in (7) and (8) of this D6420–99 (incorporated by ref- overall percent reduction of or- table. erence as specified in § 63.14), ganic HAP according to the or. procedures in § 63.2470(c)(6), and if you use ASTM D6420– 99, comply with the require- ments specified in § 63.2470(c)(14). ii. Method 25A in appendix A to Measure inlet and outlet mass part 60 of this chapter. emissions and calculate the overall percent reduction of TOC according to the proce- dures in § 63.2470(c)(7). b. Measure total organic HAP or i. Method 18 in appendix A to part Measure the outlet concentration TOC outlet concentration. 60 of this chapter or ASTM of each organic HAP present in D6420–99 (incorporated by ref- the inlet stream, report results erence as specified in § 63.14), as ppmv compound, and cal- or. culate the total organic HAP emission concentration accord- ing to the procedures in sec- tions § 63.2470(c)(8), and if you use ASTM D6420–99, comply with the requirements specified in § 63.2470(c)(14). ii. Method 25A in appendix Ato Measure the outlet concentration part 60 of this chapter. of TOC and report the results as ppmv carbon according to the procedures in section 63.2740(c)(9). 6. Vent stream controlled in a a. Measure percent reduction of i. Method 25/Method 25A in ap- Measure inlet and outlet mass combustion device, except as organic HAP or TOC, or pendix A to part 60 of this emissions, as carbon, and cal- specified in (g) and (h) of this chapter, or culate the overall percent re- table. duction of TOC according to the procedures in § 63.2470(c)(10). ii. Method 18 in appendix A to Measure the inlet and outlet mass part 60 of this chapter or ASTM emissions for each organic D6420–99 (incorporated by ref- HAP and calculate the overall erence as specified in § 63.14). percent reduction according to the procedures in § 63.2470(c)(6). Note: The total outlet mass emissions is deter- mined for the each organic HAP identified and quantified in the inlet gas stream, and if you use ASTM D6420–99, comply with the requirements specified in § 63.2470(c)(14). b. Measure total organic HAP or i. Method 25A in appendix A to Measure the outlet concentration TOC outlet concentration. part 60 of this chapter, or on an as carbon basis accord- ing to the procedures in § 63.2470(c)(9). ii. Method 18 in appendix A to Measure the outlet concentration part 60 of this chapter or ASTM of each organic HAP contained D6420–99 (incorporated by ref- in the inlet stream to the com- erence as specified in § 63.14). bustion device and calculate the total organic HAP con- centration of the outlet emis- sions according to the proce- dures in § 63.2470(c)(8), and if you use ASTM D6420–99, com- ply with the requirements in § 63.2470(c)(14). 7. Vent stream ...... Measure formaldehyde concentra- Method 316 or 320 in appendix A The procedures specified in tion or percent reduction. of this part. § 63.2470(c)(12). 8. Vent stream...... Measure carbon disulfide con- Method 18 or 15 in appendix A to The procedures specified in centrations or percent reduction. part 60 of this chapter. § 63.2470(c)(13). 9. Vent stream...... Measure hydrogen halide and Method 26 or 26A in Appendix A According to the procedures in halogen concentrations. to part 60 of this chapter. § 63.2470(c)(11).
VerDate 11
TABLE 9 TO SUBPART FFFF.—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS—Continued
According to the following require- For each * * * You must* * * Using * * * ments * * *
10. Wastewater samples ...... a. Measure HAP concentration .... i. Method 305 in appendix A of Comply with the procedures in this part, or § 63.1257(b)(10)(v). ii. Method 624, 625, 1624, or Comply with the procedures in 1625 in appendix A to part 136 § 63.1257(b)(10)(v). of this chapter, or iii. Method 8260 or 8270 in ‘‘Test As an alternative, you may use Methods for Evaluating Solid any more recent, updated Waste, Physical/Chemical version of Method 8260 or 8270 Methods,’’ EPA Publication No. that we publish. To use these SW–846, Third Edition, Sep- methods, you must maintain a tember 1986, as amended by formal quality assurance pro- Update I, November 15, 1992, gram consistent with either sec- or tion 8 of Method 8260 or Meth- od 8270, and this program must include the following elements related to measuring the con- centrations of volatile com- pounds: documentation of site- specific procedures to minimize the loss of compounds due to volatilization, biodegradation, reaction, or sorption during the sample collection, storage, and preparation steps; and -docu- mentation of specific quality as- surance procedures followed during sampling, sample prepa- ration, sample introduction, and analysis; and -measurement of the average accuracy and pre- cision of the specific proce- dures, including field duplicates and field spiking of the material source before or during sam- pling with compounds having similar characteristics to the tar- get analyte. iv. Other EPA Methods, or ...... Use procedures specified in the method, validate the method using the procedures in § 63.1257(b)(10)(iii) (A) or (B), and comply with the procedures in § 63.1257(b)(10)(v). v. Methods other than an EPA Use procedures specified in the Method. method, validate the method using the procedures in § 63.1257(b)(10)(iii) (A) and comply with the procedures in § 63.1257(b)(10)(v). 11. Vent stream controlled using a Determine compliance with flare Use methods in § 63.11(b) ...... Non applicable. flare. requirements.
As required in §§ 63.2465(a), (b), and (c), 63.2470(a), and 63.2480(a), you must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission limitation and work practice standard that applies to your continuous process vents as specified in the following table:
TABLE 10 TO SUBPART FFFF.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR CONTINUOUS PROCESS VENTS
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For * * * For the following standard * * * ***
1. Each continuous process vent with a TRE: a. Vent emissions through a closed-vent sys- You conduct an initial flare compliance as- ≤2.6 at an existing source; or ≤5.0 at a new tem to a flare that meets the performance sessment as specified in §§ 63.987(b)(3) or reconstructed source. requirements of § 63.11(b), or and 63.997; and the visible emission, net heating value, and exit velocity meet the re- quirements specified in § 63.11(b)(4), (6), and (7).
VerDate 11
TABLE 10 TO SUBPART FFFF.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR CONTINUOUS PROCESS VENTS—Continued
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For * * * For the following standard * * * ***
b. Vent emissions through a closed-vent sys- For a control device, you conduct a perform- tem to a control device that reduces HAP ance test as specified in § 63.997 (except emissions by ≤98 percent by weight, or § 63.997(e)(1)(iii) does not apply). Alter- natively, for a condenser used as a control device, you estimate uncontrolled emissions according to § 63.1257(d)(2) and controlled emissions according to § 63.1257(d)(3)(i)(B) using the results of continuous direct meas- urement of the condenser outlet gas tem- perature; and the performance test (or de- sign evaluation for a condenser) shows the control device reduces the organic HAP emissions by ≤98 percent by weight; and during the performance test (or design eval- uation for a condenser), you establish oper- ating limits for the control devices specified in Table 8 of this subpart, as applicable, ac- cording to § 63.2470(d), (e), or (f). The limit may be based on a previous performance test that meets the requirements specified in § 63.997(b)(1); and you have a record of how you determined the control device op- erating limits. c. Vent emissions through a closed-vent sys- You conduct a performance test as specified tem to a control device that reduces emis- in § 63.997(e) (except § 63.997(e)(1)(iii) sions to an outlet total organic HAP or TOC does not apply); and the performance test concentration ≤20 ppmv and reduces hy- shows the control device reduces the emis- drogen halide and halogen emissions to an sions to outlet total organic HAP or TOC outlet concentration ≤20 ppmv. concentrations ≤20 ppmv and outlet hydro- gen halide and halogen concentrations ≤20 ppmv, both corrected for supplemental gases according to § 63.2470(g); and during the performance test, you establish oper- ating limits for the control devices specified in Table 8 of this subpart, as applicable, ac- cording to § 63.2470(e) or (f); and you have a record of how you established the oper- ating limits. 2. Each continuous process vent with a TRE: Use a recovery device to maintain TRE above You establish operating limits for the recovery <2.6 at an existing source; or <5.0 at a new the minimum threshold. device specified in Table 8 of this subpart, or reconstructed source. as applicable; and you have a record of how you established the recovery device operating limits.
As required in §§ 63.2465(a), (b), and (c), 63.2470(a), and 63.2480(a), you must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission limitation and work practice standard that applies to your batch process vents as specified in the following table:
TABLE 11 TO SUBPART FFFF.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR BATCH PROCESS VENTS
For * * * For the following standard * * *
1. Batch process vents within a process with Maintain emissions below the applicable an- You determine uncontrolled HAP emissions for total HAP emissions: <10,000 lb.yr at an ex- nual mass limit threshold. each batch in accordance with isting source; or <3,000 lb/yr at a new or re- § 63.1257(d)(2)(i) and (ii); and you estimate constructed source. the number of batches to be produced an- nually and show the estimated emissions are below the applicable annual mass limit. 2. Batch process vents within a process with a. Route emissions through a closed-vent sys- You conduct an initial flare compliance as- total HAP emissions; ≤10,000 lb/yr at an ex- tem to a flare that meets the performance sessment as specified in §§ 63.987(b)(3) isting source; or ≥3,000 lb/yr at a new or re- requirements specified in § 63.11(b), or and 63.997; and the visible emissions, net constructed source. heating value, and exit velocity meet the re- quirements specified in § 63.11(b)(4), (6), and (7).
VerDate 11
TABLE 11 TO SUBPART FFFF.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR BATCH PROCESS VENTS—Continued
For * * * For the following standard * * *
b. Route emissions through a closed-vent sys- You determine total uncontrolled emissions to tem to a control device that reduces emis- the control device in accordance with sions to an outlet total organic HAP or TOC § 63.1257(d)(2)(i) and (ii), except as speci- ≤20 ppmv and an outlet hydrogen halide fied in § 63.2470 (b); and you conduct a per- and halogen concentration ≤20 ppmv, or formance test using the applicable test methods in Table 9 of this subpart and under the conditions specified in § 63.1257(b)(8) that shows the control de- vice reduces the emissions to an outlet total organic HAP or TOC concentration ≤20 ppmv and outlet hydrogen halide and halo- gen concentration ≤20 ppmv, both corrected for supplemental gases; and during the per- formance test, you establish operating limits for the control devices specified in Table 8 of this subpart, as applicable, in accordance with the requirements specified in § 63.2470(e) or (f); and you have a record of how you established the operating limits. c. Route emissions through a closed-vent sys- You determine total uncontrolled emissions to tem(s) to: a control device(s) that reduces the control device by determining the uncon- HAP emissions from the sum of all vents by trolled emissions from each vent routed to ≥98 percent by weight; or a recovery de- the control device in accordance with the vice(s) that reduces HAP emissions from the procedures specified in § 63.1257(d)(2)(i) sum of all vents by ≥95 percent by weight, and (ii), except as specified in § 63.2470(b); or and you determine controlled emissions for each batch process vent based on the re- sults of a performance test or design eval- uation conducted according to § 63.1257(d)(3); and based on the uncon- trolled and controlled emissions estimates, you determine the control device reduces HAP emissions from the sum of all vents by ≥98 percent by weight, or the recovery de- vice reduces emissions by ≥95 percent by weight; and during the performance test or design evaluation, you establish operating limits for the control devices or recovery de- vices specified in Table 8 of this subpart in accordance with § 63.2470(d), (e), or (f); and you have a record of how you deter- mined the operating limits. d. Route emissions through a closed-vent sys- You document in your notification of compli- tem to a control device specified in ance status that you route emissions to a § 63.2455(f). control device specified in § 63.2455(f).
As required in §§ 63.2465(a), (b), and (c), 63.2470(a), and 63.2480(a), you must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission limitation and work practice standard that applies to your wastewater streams, waste management units, and liquid streams in open systems within an MCPU as specified in the following table:
TABLE 12 TO SUBPART FFFF.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER STREAMS, WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS, AND LIQUID STREAMS IN OPEN SYSTEMS WITHIN AN MCPU
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For each * * * For the following standard * * * ***
1. Waste management unit ...... Install a fixed roof, floating roof, cover, or En- You design and install the fixed roofs, floating closure to supppress emissions. roofs, covers, and enclosures to meet the requirements specified in §§ 63.133 through 63.137; and you conduct suppress an initial inspection of the waste emissions manage- ment unit for improper work practices and control equipment failures in accordance with the requirements specified in §§ 63.133 through 63.137 and 63.143(a).
VerDate 11
TABLE 12 TO SUBPART FFFF.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER STREAMS, WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS, AND LIQUID STREAMS IN OPEN SYSTEMS WITHIN AN MCPU— Continued
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For each * * * For the following standard * * * ***
2. Vent stream from a waste management unit a. Vent emissions through a closed-vent sys- You conduct either a performance test in ac- tem to: a control device that reduces or- cordance with the requirements specified in ganic HAP emissions by ≥95 percent by § 63.145(i) (except when § 63.145(i)(6) and weight or to an outlet total organic HAP or (9) refer to the concentration corrections for TOC concentration ≤20 ppmv; or a combus- 3 percent O2, the correction for supple- tion device with a minimum temperature of mental gases in § 63.2470(g) apply for the 760°C, or purposes of this subpart) or a design eval- uation in accordance with the requirements specified in § 63.139(d)(2). If the control de- vice will be operated over a range of condi- tions, you are not required to test over the entire range. In such cases, you may sup- plement the performance test results with modeling and/or engineering assessments; and the performance test or design evalua- tion shows the organic HAP emissions are reduced by ≥95 percent by weight, or the TOC emissions are reduced to an outlet concentration, corrected to account for sup- plemental gases, of ≤20 ppmv; and during the design evaluation or performance test, you establish operating limits for the control devices in Table 8 of this subpart, as appli- cable, according to § 63.2470(d), (e), or (f); and you have a record of how you estab- lished the operating limits during the design evaluation or performance test. b. Vent emissions through a closed-vent sys- You conduct an initial flare compliance as- tem to a flare that meets the performance sessment as specified in §§ 63.987(b)(3) requirements of § 63.11(b) and 63.997; and the visible emissions, net heating value, and exit velocity meet the re- quirements specified in § 63.11(b)(4), (6), and (7). c. Route emissions through a closed-vent sys- You document in your notification of compli- tem to a control device specified in ance status that you route emissions to a § 63.2455(f). device specified in § 63.2455(f). 3. Affected wastewater stream ...... a. Treatment options in § 63.138(b), (c), (e), You conduct either a performance test or a (f), (g) or (i), or design evaluation in accordance with the requirements specified in § 63.138(j); and the performance test or design evaluation shows the reduction required by § 63.138(b), (c), (e), (f), (g), or (i), as appro- priate, is achieved; and during the perform- ance test or design evaluation for a biologi- cal treatment process, you establish oper- ating limits for TSS, BOD, and biomass concentration in accordance with your dis- charge permit; and for a nonbiological treat- ment unit you establish appropriate oper- ating limits described and approved in your precompliance report; and you have a record of how you established the operating limits during the design evaluation or per- formance test. b. Treatment in a design steam stripper (i.e., You document in your notification of compli- § 63.138(d)) or a treatment unit specified in ance status that you treat wastewater in a § 63.2455(f). design steam stripper or a in treatment unit in § 63.2455(f).
VerDate 11
TABLE 12 TO SUBPART FFFF.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER STREAMS, WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS, AND LIQUID STREAMS IN OPEN SYSTEMS WITHIN AN MCPU— Continued
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For each * * * For the following standard * * * ***
4. Residual removed from an affected waste- Control emissions ...... You comply with the requirements in entry 1. water stream. of this table for all waste management units used to convey, store, treat, or dispose of the residual; and You comply with one or more of the following: the requirements on entry 3. of this table for each residual that you treat in accordance with the require- ments specified in § 63.138(k)(3); install equipment or establish procedures to recy- cle the residual to a production process, sell it for recycling, or return it to the treat- ment process; you document in the notifica- tion of compliance status that you are treat- ing the residual in a unit under § 63.2455(f). 5. Maintenance wastewater stream...... Develop and implement a maintenance You developed the plan and have it available wastewater plan. onsite for inspection at any time after the compliance date.
As required in §§ 63.2465(a), (b), and (c), 63.2470(a), and 63.2480(a), you must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission limitation and work practice standard that applies to your storage tanks as specified in the following table:
TABLE 13 TO SUBPART FFFF.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR STORAGE TANKS
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For * * * For the following standard * * * ***
1. Each affected storage tank ...... a. Operate and maintain a floating roof, or You have a record of the vessel dimensions and capacity and identification of the liquid stored as specified in § 63.1065(a); and you inspect an IFR before initial filling and in- spect an EFR within 90 days of initial filling. b. Vent emissions through a closed-vent sys- You conduct a design evaluation or perform- tem to a control device that reduces HAP ance test in accordance with the require- emissions by ≥95 percent by weight, or ments specified in § 63.985(b); and the per- formance test or design evaluation shows the control device reduces HAP emissions by ≥95 percent by weight; and during the performance test or design evaluation, you establish operating limits for the control de- vices specified in Table 8 of this subpart, as applicable, according to § 63.2470(d), (e), or (f); and you have a record of how you established the operating limits. c. Vent emissions through a closed-vent sys- You conduct an initial flare compliance as- tem to a flare that meets the performance sessment as specified in §§ 63.987(b)(3) requirements of § 63.11(b), or and 63.997; and the visible emissions, net heating value, and exit velocity meet the re- quirements specified in § 63.11(b)(4), (6), and (7). d. Vapor balance ...... You document in the notification of compli- ance status that you are complying by vapor balancing and certify that the pres- sure relief device setting on the storage tank is ≥2.5 psig on the compliance date; and for the owner or operator of a reloading or cleaning facility, you: submit the written certification required by § 63.1253(f)(7)(i); and if you use a closed-vent system and control device to control emissions, you comply with entry 1.b. of this Table.
As required in §§ 63.2465(a), (b), and (c), 63.2470(a), 63.2480(a), and 63.2505(b)(6), you must demonstrate initial compliance with each work practice standard that applies to your equipment leaks, closed-vent systems, and heat exchange systems as specified in the following table:
VerDate 11
TABLE 14 TO SUBPART FFFF.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR EQUIPMENT LEAKS, CLOSED-VENT SYSTEMS, AND HEAT EXCHANGE SYSTEMS
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For * * * For the following standard * * * ***
1. Each piece of equipment in organic HAP Comply with §§ 63.1022 and 63.1024 through You implemented an LDAR program by the service and not described in § 63.1019(c) 63.1037. compliance date. through (e). 2. Each piece of equipment in organic HAP Identify the equipment as specified in You create a list with the required identifica- service <300 hr/yr. § 63.1022(b)(5). tion record by the compliance date. 3. Closed-vent system ...... You conduct an initial inspection of the closed-vent system and maintain records in accordance with § 63.983(b) and (c) by the compliance date; and you prepare a written plan for inspecting unsafe-to-inspect and difficult-to-inspect equipment in accordance with § 63.983(b) and (c) by the compliance date; and you repair any leaks and maintain records in accordance with § 63.983(d). 4. Closed-vent system with a bypass line that ...... You have a record documenting that you ei- could divert vent streams away from a control ther installed a flow indicator or that you se- device. cured the bypass line valve in accordance with entry 4. in Table 5 of this subpart. 5. Heat exchange system used to cool process Monitor for and repair leaks ...... You determine that the heat exchange system equipment or materials in an MCPU. is exempt from monitoring requirements be- cause it meets one of the conditions in § 63.104(a)(1) or through (6), and you docu- ment this finding in your notification of com- pliance status; or if your heat exchange system is not exempt, you either: identify in your notification of compliance status the HAP or other representative substance that you will monitor; or prepare and maintain a monitoring plan containing the information required by § 63.104(c)(1)(i) through (iv) that documents the procedures you will use to detect leaks by monitoring surrogate indi- cators of the leak.
As required in §§ 63.2465(a), (b), and (c), 63.2470(a), and 63.2480(a), you must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission limitation and work practice standard that applies to your transfer operations as specified in the following table:
TABLE 15 TO SUBPART FFFF.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR TRANSFER OPERATIONS
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For * * * For the following standard * * * ***
1. Transfer operations ...... a. Vapor balance, or ...... You document in the notification of compli- ance status that you are complying with vapor balancing. b. Route emissions through a closed-vent You conduct an initial flare compliance as- system to a flare that meets the perform- sessment as specified in §§ 63.987(b)(3) ance requirements of § 63.11(b), or and 63.997; and the visible emissions, net heating value, and exit velocity meet re- quirements specified in § 63.11(b)(4), (6), and (7). c. Route emissions through a closed-vent sys- You conduct a design evaluation or perform- tem to a control device that reduces HAP ance test according to the requirements in by ≥98 percent by weight or to an outlet § 63.985(b); and the performance test or TOC concentrations ≤20 ppmv and outlet design evaluation shows the TOC or total hydrogen halides and halogen concentra- organic HAP emissions are reduced by ≥98 tion ≤20 ppmv, or percent by weight, or to outlet concentration ≤20 ppmv as TOC and ≤20 ppmv of hydro- gen halides and halogens both corrected for supplemental gases in accordance with § 63.2470(g); and during the performance test or design evaluation, you establish op- erating limits for the control devices speci- fied in Table 8 of this subpart, as applica- ble, in accordance with § 63.2470(d), (e), and (f); and you have a record of how you determined the operating limits.
VerDate 11
TABLE 15 TO SUBPART FFFF.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR TRANSFER OPERATIONS—Continued
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For * * * For the following standard * * * ***
d. Route emissions through a closed-vent You document in your notification of compli- system to a control device specified in ance status that you route emissions to a § 63.2455(f). device specified in § 63.2455(f).
As required in §§ 63.2465(a), (b), and (c), 63.2470(a), 63.2480(a), and 63.2505(b)(5), you must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission limitation that applies to your halogenated vent streams controlled with a combustion device as specified in the following table:
TABLE 16 TO SUBPART FFFF.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS FOR HALOGENATED VENT STREAMS CONTROLLED WITH A COMBUSTION DEVICE
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For each * * * For the following standard * * * ***
1. Halogenated vent stream from a continuous a. Use a halogen reduction device after the You conduct a performance test according to process vent. combustion device to reduce emissions of the procedures specified in § 63.997; and hydrogen halides and halogen, or the performance test shows the hydrogen halide and halogen emissions are reduced by at least 99 percent by weight or to less than 0.45 kg/hr; and you establish operating limits for the halogen reduction device dur- ing the performance test in accordance with § 63.2470(e) or (f); and you have a record of how you determine the operating limits. b. Use a halogen reduction device before the You determine the halogen atom mass emis- combustion device to reduce the halogen sion rate prior to the combustion device to atom mass emission rate to <0.45 kg/hr. be <0.45 kg/hr based on an engineering as- sessment or performance test conducted in accordance with the requirements specified in § 63.2462(b)(1); and you establish oper- ating limits for the halogen reduction device during the engineering assessment or per- formance test in accordance with § 63.2470(d), (e), or (f); and you have a record of how you determined the operating limit for the halogen reduction device. 2. Halogenated vent stream from a batch proc- a. Use a halogen reduction device after the You conduct a performance test according to ess vent, waste management unit, or transfer combustion device to reduce emissions of the procedures specified in § 63.997; and operation. hydrogen halides and halogen, or the performance test shows the hydrogen halide and halogen emissions are reduced by at least 95 percent by weight or to less than 20 ppmv; and you establish operating limits for the halogen reduction device dur- ing the performance test in accordance with § 63.2470(e) or (f); and you have a record of how you determine the operating limits. b. Use a halogen reduction device before the You determine the halogen atom mass emis- combustion device to reduce the halogen sion rate prior to the combustion device to atom mass emission rate to <20 ppmv. be ≤20 ppmv based on an engineering as- sessment or performance test in accord- ance with § 63.2462(b)(2); and you estab- lish operating limits for the halogen reduc- tion device during the engineering assess- ment or performance test analysis in ac- cordance with § 63.2470(d), (e), or (f); and you have a record of how you determined the operating limit for the halogen reduction device.
As required in §§ 63.2490(a) and 63.2525(c), you must demonstrate continuous compliance with each emission limita- tion that applies to you as specified in the following table:
VerDate 11
TABLE 17 TO SUBPART FFFF.—CONTINUOUS COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITS
You must demonstrate continuous compliance For*** For the following emission limit*** by***
1. Each vent stream controlled with a con- Percent reduction, outlet concentration, or Collecting the condenser outlet temperature denser. TRE limit. data according to § 63.2475(b); and reduc- ing condenser outlet temperature data to daily or block averages according to cal- culations in § 63.2475(b); and maintaining the daily or block average condenser outlet temperature no higher than the level estab- lished during the initial performance test or design evaluation. 2. Batch process vents within processes with Maintain the emissions below the applicable Calculate daily a 365-day rolling summation of uncontrolled total HAP emissions: <10,000 lb/ annual mass emission limits. HAP emissions. yr at an existing source; or <3,000 lb/yr at a new or reconstructed source.
As required in §§ 63.2490(a), 63.2505(c)(1)(iv)(B), and 63.2525(c), you must demonstrate continuous compliance with each operating limit that applies to you as specified in the following table:
TABLE 18 TO SUBPART FFFF.—CONTINUOUS COMPLIANCE WITH OPERATING LIMITS
You must demonstrate continuous compliance For * * * For the following operating limit * * * by * * *
1. Each thermal incinerator that is used to con- Temperature of gases exiting the combustion Collecting the temperature data according to trol an emission stream subject to an emis- chamber. § 63.2475(b); and reducing the temperature sion limitation and that has inlet HAP emis- data to daily or block averages according to sions ≥1 ton/yr. calculations in § 63.2475(b); and maintain- ing the daily or block average temperature of gases exiting the combustion chamber no lower than the value established during the initial performance test or design eval- uation. 2. Each catalytic incinerator that is used to con- Temperature of the gas stream immediately Collecting the temperature data according to trol an emission stream subject to an emis- before the catalyst bed and, if applicable, § 63.2475(b); and reducing the inlet tem- sion limitation and that has inlet HAP emis- the temperature difference across the cata- perature data to daily or block average ac- sions ≥1 ton/yr. lyst bed. cording to calculations in § 63.2475(b); and maintaining the daily or block average tem- perature of the gas stream immediately be- fore the catalyst bed no lower than the value established during the initial perform- ance test or design evaluation; and if appli- cable, maintaining the quarterly reading of the temperature difference across the cata- lyst bed no lower than 90 percent of the value established during the initial compli- ance determination. 3. Each boiler or process heater that is used to Temperature of the gases exiting the combus- Collecting the temperature data according to control an emission stream that is subject to tion chamber. § 63.2475(b); and reducing the temperature an emission limitation, that has inlet HAP data to daily or block averages according to emissions ≥1 ton/yr, and for which the vent calculations in § 63.2475(b); and maintain- streams are not introduced with the primary ing the daily or block average temperature fuel or the design heat input capacity is <44 of the gas stream exiting the combustion MW. chamber no lower than the value estab- lished during the initial performance test or design evaluation. 4. Each regenerative carbon adsorber that has The regeneration frequency, temperature to Collecting the data for each regeneration inlet emission streams containing ≥1 ton/yr of which the bed is heated during regenera- cycle; and conducting inspections, compli- HAP. tion, temperature to which the bed is cooled ance checks, and calibrations according to within 15 minutes of the completion of the § 63.2475(b)(4); and for each regeneration cooling phase, and the regeneration stream cycle, maintaining the regeneration tem- flow rate. perature to which the bed is heated during regeneration, temperature to which the bed is cooled within 15 minutes of the comple- tion of the cooling phase, and the regenera- tion stream flow rate within the operating levels established during the initial perform- ance test or design evaluation.
VerDate 11
TABLE 18 TO SUBPART FFFF.—CONTINUOUS COMPLIANCE WITH OPERATING LIMITS—Continued
You must demonstrate continuous compliance For * * * For the following operating limit * * * by * * *
5. Each water scrubber with inlet HAP emis- Scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure drop ...... Collecting the scrubber liquid flow rate or sions ≥1 ton/yr. pressure drop data according to § 63.2475(b); and reducing the flow rate or pressure drop data to daily or block aver- ages according to § 63.2475(b); and main- taining the daily or block average water scrubber flow rate or pressure drop no lower than the value established during the initial performance test or design evalua- tion. 6. Each caustic scrubber with inlet HAP emis- Scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure drop and Collecting the scrubber liquid flow rate or sions ≥1 ton/yr. pH of the scrubber effluent. pressure drop data according to § 63.2475(b); and collecting the scrubber ef- fluent pH data according to § 63.2475(b); and reducing the scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure drop data to daily or block aver- ages according to calculations in § 63.2475(b); and reducing the scrubber ef- fluent pH data to daily or block averages according to the calculations in § 63.2475(b); and maintaining the daily or block average scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure drop, and the daily or block aver- age scrubber effluent pH, no lower than the values established during the initial per- formance test or design evaluation. 7. Each control device with inlet HAP emissions As identified in your precompliance report ...... Following the procedures in your approved <1 ton/yr for which you received approval to precompliance report to verify on a daily or comply with operating limits different from block basis that the control device is oper- those described in entries (a) through (f) of ating properly. this table. 8. Each design steam stripper ...... Steam-to-wastewater ratio, wastewater tem- Collecting the steam mass flow rate, waste- perature, and wastewater loading. water flow rate, and wastewater (or column operating) temperature data according to § 63.2475(b); and reducing the data to daily or block averages according to § 63.2475(b); and maintaining the steam-to- wastewater ratio ≥0.04 kg/liter, the waste- water temperature (or column operating temperature) ≥95°C, and the wastewater loading ≤67,100 liters per hour per square meter. 9. Each nonbiological treatment wastewater Parameters as approved by permitting author- Collecting and reducing data as specified by treatment unit, except a design steam strip- ity. the permitting authority and maintaining pa- per. rameter levels within the limits approved by the permitting authority. 10. Each biological treatment unit ...... TSS, BOD, and the biomass concentration .... Collecting the data at the frequency approved by the permitting authority and using meth- ods approved by the permitting authority; and maintaining the TSS, BOD, and bio- mass concentration within levels approved by the permitting authority.
As required in §§ 63.2490(a), 63.2505(c)(4), and 63.2525(c), you must demonstrate continuous compliance with each work practice standard that applies to you as specified in the following table:
TABLE 19 TO SUBPART FFFF.—CONTINUOUS COMPLIANCE WITH WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS
For the following work practice standard * * * You must demonstrate continuous compliance by * * *
1. Install a floating roof on a storage tank ...... Conducting the inspections in § 63.1063(d) at the frequency specified in § 63.1063(c); and repairing any failures detected during the in- spection as specified in § 63.1063(e); and maintaining records of in- spections, repairs, floating roof landings, and vessel dimensions and capacity as specified in § 63.1065.
VerDate 11
TABLE 19 TO SUBPART FFFF.—CONTINUOUS COMPLIANCE WITH WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS—Continued
For the following work practice standard * * * You must demonstrate continuous compliance by * * *
2. Install emission suppression equipment for waste management units Conducting semi-annual visual inspections of each fixed roof, cover, as specified in §§ 63.133 through 63.137. and enclosure for visible, audible, or olfactory indications of leaks as specified in §§ 63.133 through 63.137; and conducting inspections, repairing failures, and documenting delay or repair for each fixed roof, cover, and enclosure as specified in §§ 63.133 through 63.137 maintain records of failures and corrective actions; and for each floating roof installed on a wastewater tank, conducting inspections, repairing failures, and maintaining records as specified in entry 1. of this table for storage tanks. 3. Implement the LDAR requirements in §§ 63.1025 through 63.1037 ... Performing the required monitoring on the required schedule, repairing leaks within the specified time period according to §§ 63.1025 through 63.1037; and keeping records according to § 63.1038(b). 4. Vent transfer operation emissions back to the process or originating Conducting annual inspections, repairing leaks, and recording results in vessel. accordance with the requirements for closed-vent systems in entries (i) and (j) of this table. 5. Controlling emissions with a flare ...... Continuously monitoring for the presence of pilot flame as specified in § 63.987(c) and keeping records of the monitoring results as speci- fied in § 63.998(a)(1)(ii) and (iii). 6. Controlling emissions with a nonregenerative carbon adsorber ...... Monitoring the operating time during which the carbon adsorber is used; and replacing the cannister within the time interval established during the initial compliance demonstration. 7. Inspect and repair heat exchange systems ...... Monitoring for HAP compounds, other substances, or surrogate indica- tors at the frequency specified in § 63.104(b) or (c), repairing leaks within the time period specified in § 63.104(d)(1), confirming that the repair is successful as specified in § 63.104(d)(2), following the pro- cedures in § 63.104(e) if you implement delay of repair, and record- ing the results of inspections and repair according to § 63.104(f)(1). 8. Cover liquid streams in open systems within an MCPU ...... Complying with entry 2. of this table. 9. Inspect closed-vent systems...... Conducting the inspections and maintaining records according to § 63.983(b) and (c) and repairing leaks according to § 63.983(d). 10. Monitor bypass lines in closed-vent systems ...... If using a flow indicator, ensuring that flow indicator readings are taken at least once every 15 minutes, maintaining hourly records of wheth- er the flow indicator was operating and whether a diversion was de- tected at any time during the hour, recording all periods when the vent stream is diverted from the control stream or the flow indicator is not operating; or if you secure the bypass line valve in the closed- position, maintain a record that the monthly visual inspection of the seal or closure mechanism has been done; and recording the occur- rence of all periods when the seal mechanism is broken, the bypass line valve position has changed, or the key for a lock-and-key type lock has been checked out. 11. Develop and implement maintenance wastewater plan ...... Implementing the procedures in the plan for each wastewater stream according to § 63.105(d), modifying and updating the procedures as needed according to § 63.105(c), and maintaining records of the plan and updates according to § 63.105(e). 12. Vapor balancing for storage tanks ...... Operating and monitoring the vapor balancing system as specified in § 63.1253(f)(1) through (5), maintaining a record of DOT certifications required by § 63.1253(f)(2), and maintaining a record of the pressure relief vent setting that shows it is ≥2.5 psig; and if you are the owner or operator of a reloading or cleaning facility, controlling emissions from reloading or cleaning as specified in § 63.1253(f)(6) and (7). 13. Conduct annual catalyst test for catalytic incinerators ...... Conducting a catalyst test once per year that shows the activity of the carbon is acceptable.
As required in § 63.2520(a) and (b), you must submit each report that applies to you on the schedule shown in the following table:
TABLE 20 TO SUBPART FFFF.—REQUIREMENTS FOR REPORTS
You must submit a(n) The report must contain * * * You must submit the report * * *
1. Precompliance report ...... The information specified in § 63.2520(c); and At least 6 months prior to the compliance if you comply with the pollution prevention date; or for new sources, with the applica- standard, the demonstration summary spec- tion for approval of construction or recon- ified in § 63.2495(f). struction. 2. Compliance report ...... The information specified in § 63.2520(d) ...... Semiannually according to the requirements in § 63.2520(b).
VerDate 11
TABLE 20 TO SUBPART FFFF.—REQUIREMENTS FOR REPORTS—Continued
You must submit a(n) The report must contain * * * You must submit the report * * *
3. Immediate startup, shutdown, and malfunc- a. Actions taken for the event, and ...... By fax or telephone within 2 working days tion report if you had a startup, shutdown, or after starting actions inconsistent with the malfunction during the reporting period that is plan. not consistent with your startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan. b. The information in § 63.10(d)(5)(ii) ...... By letter within 7 working days after the end of the event unless you have made alter- native arrangements with the permitting au- thority (§ 63.10(d)(5)(ii)).
As specified in § 63.2540, the parts of the General Provisions that apply to you are shown in the following table:
TABLE 21 TO SUBPART FFFF.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (SUBPART A) TO SUBPART FFFF OF PART 63
Citation Subject Brief description Explanation
§ 63.1 ...... Applicability ...... Initial applicability determination; Yes. Applicability after Standard es- tablished; Permit requirements; extensions, notifications. § 63.2 ...... Definitions ...... Definitions for part 63 standards .. Yes. § 63.3 ...... Units and Abbreviations ...... Units and abbreviations for part Yes. 63 standards. § 63.4 ...... Prohibited Activities...... Prohibited activities; compliance Yes. date; Circumvention, sever- ability. § 63.5 ...... Construction/Reconstruction ...... Applicability; Applications; Ap- Yes. provals. § 63.6(a) ...... Applicability ...... General Provisions apply unless Yes. compliance extension; General Provisions apply to area sources that become major. § 63.6(b)(1)–(4) ...... Compliance Dates for New and Standards apply at effective date; Yes. Reconstructed sources. 3 years after effective date; upon startup; 10 years after construction or reconstruction commences for section 112(f). § 63.6(b)(5) ...... Notification ...... Must notify if commenced con- Yes. struction or reconstruction after proposal. § 63.6(b)(6) ...... [Reserved] § 63.6(b)(7) ...... Compliance Dates for New and Area sources that become major Yes. Reconstructed Area Sources must comply with major source That Become Major. standards immediately upon becoming major, regardless of whether required to comply when they were an area source. § 63.6(c)(1)–(2) ...... Compliance Dates for Existing Comply according to date in sub- Yes. Sources. part, which must be no later than 3 years after effective date; For section 112(f) stand- ards, comply within 90 days of effective date unless compli- ance extension. § 63.6(c)(3)–(4) ...... [Reserved] § 63.6(c)(5) ...... Compliance Dates for Existing Area sources that become major Yes. Area Sources That Become must comply with major source Major. standards by date indicated in subpart or by equivalent time period (for example, 3 years). § 63.6(d) ...... [Reserved] § 63.6(e)(1)–(2) ...... Operation & Maintenance ...... Operate to minimize emissions at Yes. all times; Correct malfunctions as soon as practicable; Oper- ation and maintenance require- ments independently enforce- able; information Administrator will use to determine if oper- ation and maintenance require- ments were met.
VerDate 11
TABLE 21 TO SUBPART FFFF.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (SUBPART A) TO SUBPART FFFF OF PART 63— Continued
Citation Subject Brief description Explanation
§ 63.6(e)(3) ...... Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunc- Requirement for SSM and start- Yes. tion Plan (SSMP). up, shutdown, malfunction plan; Content of SSMP. § 63.6(f)(1) ...... Compliance Except During SSM You must comply with emission Yes. standards at all times except during SSM. § 63.6(f)(2)–(3) ...... Methods for Determining Compli- Compliance based on perform- Yes. ance. ance test, operation and main- tenance plans, records, inspec- tion. § 63.6(g)(1)–(3) ...... Alternative Standard...... Procedures for getting an alter- Yes. native standard. § 63.6(h) ...... Opacity/Visible Emission (VE) Requirements for opacity and Only for flares for which Method Standards. visible emission limits. 22 observations are required as part of a flare compliance as- sessment. § 63.6(i)(1)–(14) ...... Compliance Extension ...... Procedures and criteria for Ad- Yes. ministrator to grant compliance extension. § 63.6(j) ...... Presidential Compliance Exemp- President may exempt source Yes. tion. category from requirement to comply with rule. § 63.7(a)(1)–(2) ...... Performance Test Dates ...... Dates for Conducting Initial Per- Yes, except that § 63.2465(a) formance Testing and Other specifies that you must conduct Compliance Demonstrations; initial compliance demonstra- must conduct 180 days after tions before the compliance first subject to rule. date for existing sources in op- eration before the effective date. § 63.7(a)(3) ...... Section 114 Authority ...... Administrator may require a per- Yes. formance test under CAA Sec- tion 114 at any time. § 63.7(b)(1) ...... Notification of Performance Test Must notify Administrator 60 days Yes. before the test. § 63.7(b)(2) ...... Notification of Rescheduling...... If rescheduling a performance Yes. test is necessary, must notify Administrator 5 days before scheduled date of rescheduled date. § 63.7(c) ...... Quality Assurance/Test Plan...... Requirement to submit site-spe- Yes, except the test plan must be cific test plan 60 days before submitted with the notification the test or on date Adminis- of the performance test if the trator agrees with; Test plan control device controls batch approval procedures; Perform- process vents. ance audit requirements; Inter- nal and External QA proce- dures for testing. § 63.7(d) ...... Testing Facilities ...... Requirements for testing facilities Yes. § 63.7(e)(1) ...... Conditions for Conducting Per- Performance tests must be con- Yes, except that performance formance Tests. ducted under representative tests for batch process vents conditions; cannot conduct per- must be conducted under formance tests during SSM; not worst-case conditions as speci- a violation to exceed standard fied in § 63.2470 and Table 11 during SSM. to this subpart. § 63.7(e)(2) ...... Conditions for Conducting Per- Must conduct according to rule Yes. formance Tests. and EPA test methods unless Administrator approves alter- native. § 63.7(e)(3) ...... Test Run Duration ...... Must have three test runs of at Yes. least 1 hour each; Compliance is based on arithmetic mean of three runs; Conditions when data from an additional test run can be used. § 63.7(f) ...... Alternative Test Method...... Procedures by which Adminis- Yes. trator can grant approval to use an alternative test method.
VerDate 11
TABLE 21 TO SUBPART FFFF.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (SUBPART A) TO SUBPART FFFF OF PART 63— Continued
Citation Subject Brief description Explanation
§ 63.7(g) ...... Performance Test Data Analysis Must include raw data in perform- Yes. ance test report; Must submit performance test data 60 days after end of test with the Notifi- cation of Compliance Status; Keep data for 5 years. § 63.7(h) ...... Waiver of Tests...... Procedures for Administrator to Yes. waive performance test. § 63.8(a)(1) ...... Applicability of Monitoring Re- Subject to all monitoring require- Yes. quirements. ments in standard. § 63.8(a)(2) ...... Performance Specifications ...... Performance Specifications in ap- Yes. pendix B of part 60 apply. § 63.8(a)(3) ...... [Reserved]. § 63.8(a)(4) ...... Monitoring with Flares ...... Unless your rule says otherwise, Yes. the requirements for flares in § 63.11 apply. § 63.8(b)(1) ...... Monitoring ...... Must conduct monitoring accord- Yes. ing to standard unless Adminis- trator approves alternative. § 63.8(b)(2)–(3) ...... Multiple Effluents and Multiple Specific requirements for install- Yes. Monitoring Systems. ing monitoring systems; Must install on each effluent before it is combined and before it is re- leased to the atmosphere un- less Administrator approves otherwise; If more than one monitoring system on an emis- sion point, must report all moni- toring system results, unless one monitoring system is a backup. § 63.8(c)(1) ...... Monitoring System Operation and Maintain monitoring system in a Yes. Maintenance. manner consistent with good air pollution control practices. § 63.8(c)(1)(i) ...... Routine and Predictable SSM ...... Follow the SSM plan for routine Yes. repairs; keep parts for routine repairs readily available; report- ing requirements for SSM when action is described in SSM plan. § 63.8(c)(1)(ii) ...... SSM not in SSMP ...... Reporting requirements for SSM Yes. when action is not described in SSM plan. § 63.8(c)(1)(iii) ...... Compliance with Operation and How Administrator determines if Yes. Maintenance Requirements. source complying with oper- ation and maintenance require- ments; Review of source oper- ation and maintenance proce- dures, records, Manufacturer’s instructions, recommendations, and inspection of monitoring system. § 63.8(c)(2)–(3) ...... Monitoring System Installation ..... Must install to get representative Yes. emission and parameter meas- urements; Must verify oper- ational status before or at per- formance test. § 63.8(c)(4) ...... CMS Requirements ...... CMS must be operating except No. CMS requirements are speci- during breakdown, out-of-con- fied in § 63.2485. trol, repair, maintenance, and high-level calibration drifts. § 63.8(c)(4)(i)–(ii) ...... COMS must have a minimum of Only for the alternative standard, one cycle of sampling and but § 63.8(c)(4)(i) does not analysis for each successive apply because the alternative 10-second period and one standard does not require cycle of data recording for each COMS. successive 6-minute period; CEMS must have a minimum of one cycle of operation for each successive 15-minute pe- riod.
VerDate 11
TABLE 21 TO SUBPART FFFF.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (SUBPART A) TO SUBPART FFFF OF PART 63— Continued
Citation Subject Brief description Explanation
§ 63.8(c)(5) ...... COMS Minimum Procedures ...... COMS minimum procedures ...... No. This subpart FFFF does not contain opacity or VE limits. § 63.8(c)(6) ...... CMS Requirements...... Zero and High level calibration Only for the alternative standard check requirements; Out-of- in § 63.2505. control periods. § 63.8(c)(7)–(8) ...... CMS Requirements...... Out-of-Control period, including No, except for the alternative reporting. standard in § 63.2505. § 63.8(d) ...... CMS Quality Control...... Requirements for CMS quality Only for the alternative standard control, including calibration, in § 63.2505. etc.; Must keep quality control plan on record for 5 years. Keep old versions for 5 years after revisions. § 63.8(e) ...... CMS Performance Evaluation ...... Notification, performance evalua- Only for the alternative standard tion test plan, reports. in § 63.2505, but § 63.8(e)(5)(ii) does not apply because the al- ternative standard does not re- quire COMS. For existing sources, the performance eval- uation must be completed prior to the compliance date, and the results must be included in the notification of compliance sta- tus. § 63.8(f)(1)–(5) ...... Alternative Monitoring Method ..... Procedures for Administrator to Yes, except you may also request approve alternative monitoring. approval using the precompliance report. § 63.8(f)(6) ...... Alternative to Relative Accuracy Procedures for Administrator to Only for the alternative standard Test. approve alternative relative ac- in § 63.2505. curacy tests for CEMS. § 63.8(g)(1)–(4) ...... Data Reduction...... COMS 6-minute averages cal- Only for the alternative standard culated over at least 36 evenly in § 63.2505, except that the re- spaced data points; CEMS 1- quirements for COMS do not hour averages computed over apply because subpart FFFF at least 4 equally spaced data has no opacity or VE limits, points. and § 63.8(g)(2) does not apply because data reduction require- ments are specified in § 63.2475(a)(5). § 63.8(g)(5) ...... Data Reduction ...... Data that can’t be used in com- No. Data reduction procedures puting averages for CEMS and are specified in § 63.2485(b). COMS. § 63.9(a) ...... Notification Requirements ...... Applicability and State Delegation Yes. § 63.9(b)(1)–(5) ...... Initial Notifications ...... Submit notification 120 days after Yes. effective date; Notification of in- tent to construct/reconstruct; Notification of commencement of construct/reconstruct; Notifi- cation of startup; Contents of each notification. § 63.9(c) ...... Request for Compliance Exten- Can request if cannot comply by Yes. sion. date or if installed BACT/LAER. § 63.9(d) ...... Notification of Special Compli- For sources that commence con- Yes. ance Requirements for New struction between proposal and Source. promulgation and want to com- ply 3 years after effective date. § 63.9(e) ...... Notification of Performance Test Notify Administrator 60 days prior Yes. § 63.9(f) ...... Notification of VE/Opacity Test .... Notify Administrator 30 days prior No. Subpart FFFF does not con- tain opacity or VE limits. § 63.9(g) ...... Additional Notifications When Notification of performance eval- Only for the alternative standard Using CMS. uation; Notification using in § 63.2505. COMS data; Notification that exceeded criterion for relative accuracy.
VerDate 11
TABLE 21 TO SUBPART FFFF.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (SUBPART A) TO SUBPART FFFF OF PART 63— Continued
Citation Subject Brief description Explanation
§ 63.9(h)(1)–(6) ...... Notification of Compliance Status Contents; Due 60 days after end Yes, except subpart FFFF has no of performance test or other opacity or VE limits, and compliance demonstration, ex- § 63.2515(e). (1) specifies that cept for opacity/VE, which are the Notification of Compliance due 30 days after; When to Status is due by the compli- submit to Federal vs. State au- ance date for parts of existing thority. sources in operation prior to the effective date, and § 63.2515(e). (2) specifies that the Notification of Compliance Status is due within 240 days after the compliance date for all other affected sources. § 63.9(i) ...... Adjustment of Submittal Dead- Procedures for Administrator to Yes. lines. approve change in when notifi- cations must be submitted. § 63.9(j) ...... Change in Previous Information .. Must submit within 15 days after Yes. the change. § 63.10(a) ...... Recordkeeping/Reporting ...... Applies to all, unless compliance Yes. extension; When to submit to Federal vs. State authority; Procedures for owners of more than 1 source. § 63.10(b)(1) ...... Recordkeeping/Reporting ...... General Requirements; Keep all Yes. records readily available; Keep for 5 years. § 63.10(b)(2)(i)–(iv) ...... Records related to Startup, Shut- Occurrence of each of operation Yes. down, and Malfunction. (process equipment); Occur- rence of each malfunction of air pollution equipment; Mainte- nance on air pollution control equipment; Actions during start- up, shutdown, and malfunction. § 63.10(b)(2)(vi), (x), and (xi) ...... CMS Records ...... Malfunctions, inoperative, out-of- Yes. control; Calibration checks; Ad- justments, maintenance. § 63.10(b)(2)(vii)–(ix) ...... Records ...... Measurements to demonstrate Yes. compliance with emission limi- tations; Performance test, per- formance evaluation, and visi- ble emission observation re- sults; Measurements to deter- mine conditions of performance tests and performance evalua- tions. § 63.10(b)(2)(xii) ...... Records ...... Records when under waiver ...... Yes. § 63.10(b)(2)(xiii) ...... Records ...... Records when using alternative to Only for the alternative standard relative accuracy test. in § 63.2505. § 63.10(b)(2)(xiv) ...... Records ...... All documentation supporting Ini- Yes. tial Notification and Notification of Compliance Status. § 63.10(b)(3) ...... Records ...... Applicability Determinations ...... Yes. § 63.10(c)(1)–(6),(9)–(15) ...... Records ...... Additional Records for CMS ...... Only for the alternative standard in § 63.2505. § 63.10(c)(7)–(8) ...... Records ...... Records of excess emissions and No. Recordkeeping requirements parameter monitoring are specified in § 63.2525. exceedances for CMS (now de- fined as deviations). § 63.10(d)(1) ...... General Reporting Requirements Requirement to report ...... Yes. § 63.10(d)(2) ...... Report of Performance Test Re- When to submit to Federal or Yes. sults. State authority. § 63.10(d)(3) ...... Reporting Opacity or VE Obser- What to report and when ...... No. Subpart FFFF does not con- vations. tain opacity or VE limits. § 63.10(d)(4) ...... Progress Reports ...... Must submit progress reports on Yes. schedule if under compliance extension. § 63.10(d)(5) ...... Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunc- Contents and submission ...... Yes. tion Reports.
VerDate 11
TABLE 21 TO SUBPART FFFF.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (SUBPART A) TO SUBPART FFFF OF PART 63— Continued
Citation Subject Brief description Explanation
§ 63.10(e)(1)–(2) ...... Additional CMS Reports ...... Must report results for each CEM Only for the alternative standard, on a unit; Written copy of per- but § 63.10(e)(2)(ii) does not formance evaluation; 3 copies apply because the alternative of COMS performance evalua- standard does not require tion. COMS. § 63.10(e)(3) ...... Reports ...... Excess Emission Reports ...... No. Reporting requirements are specified in § 63.2520. § 63.10(e)(3)(i)–(iii) ...... Reports ...... Schedule for reporting excess No. Reporting requirements are emissions and parameter mon- specified in § 63.2520. itor exceedance (now defined as deviations). § 63.10(e)(3)(iv)–(v) ...... Excess Emissions Reports ...... Requirement to revert to quarterly No. Reporting requirements are submission if there is an ex- specified in § 63.2520. cess emissions and parameter monitor exceedance (now de- fined as deviations); Provision to request semiannual reporting after compliance for one year; Submit report by 30th day fol- lowing end of quarter or cal- endar half; If there has not been an exceedance or excess emission (now defined as devi- ations), report contents is a statement that there have been no deviations. § 63.10(e)(3)(iv)–(v) ...... Excess Emissions Reports ...... Must submit report containing all No. Reporting requirements are of the information in specified in § 63.2520. § 63.10(c)(5)–(13), § 63.8(c)(7)– (8). § 63.10(e)(3)(vi)–(viii) ...... Excess Emissions Report and Requirements for reporting ex- No. Reporting requirements are Summary Report. cess emissions for CMSs (now specified in § 63.2520. called deviations); Requires all of the information in § 63.10(c)(5)–(13), § 63.8(c)(7)– (8). § 63.10(e)(4) ...... Reporting COMS data ...... Must submit COMS data with per- No. Subpart FFFF does not con- formance test data. tain opacity or VE limits. § 63.10(f) ...... Waiver for Recordkeeping/Report- Procedures for Administrator to Yes. ing. waive. § 63.11 ...... Flares ...... Requirements for flares ...... Yes. § 63.12 ...... Delegation ...... State authority to enforce stand- Yes. ards. § 63.13 ...... Addresses ...... Addresses where reports, notifi- Yes. cations, and requests are sent. § 63.14 ...... Incorporation by Reference ...... Test methods incorporated by ref- Yes. erence. § 63.15 ...... Availability of Information ...... Public and confidential informa- Yes. tion.
3. Part 63 is amended by adding 63.7995 When do I have to comply with 63.8025 By what date must I conduct subpart HHHHH to read as follows: this subpart? performance tests or other initial compliance demonstrations? Emission Limitations and Work Practice 63.8030 What performance tests, design Subpart HHHHH—National Emission Standards Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants evaluations, and other procedures must 63.8000 What emission limitations and I use? for Miscellaneous Coating work practice standards must I meet? 63.8035 What are my monitoring Manufacturing installation, operation, and maintenance General Compliance Requirements requirements? Sec. 63.8010 What are my general requirements 63.8040 How do I demonstrate initial for complying with this subpart? compliance with the emission What this Subpart Covers limitations and work practice standards? 63.7980 What is the purpose of this Testing and Initial Compliance subpart? Requirements Continuous Compliance Requirements 63.7985 Am I subject to the requirements in 63.8015 How do I determine whether vent 63.8045 How do I monitor and collect data this subpart? streams are halogenated? to demonstrate continuous compliance? 63.7990 What parts of my plant does this 63.8020 How do I determine which 63.8050 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission subpart cover? wastewater streams are affected wastewater streams? limitations and work practice standards?
VerDate 11
Alternative Means of Compliance Standards for Equipment Leaks, Closed- (1) Process vessels. 63.8055 How do I comply with the Vent Systems, and Heat Exchange (2) Storage tanks for feedstocks, alternative standard? Systems recovered solvents, and products. You 63.8060 How do I conduct emissions Table 13 to Subpart HHHHH—Initial must assign storage tanks to the averaging for process vessels? Compliance With Emission Limitations miscellaneous coating manufacturing and Work Practice Standards for Transfer 63.8065 How may I transfer wastewater to operations according to the procedures a treatment unit that I do not own or Operations operate? Table 14 to Subpart HHHHH—Initial described in § 63.7990(c). Compliance With Emission Limitations (3) Equipment in open systems that is Notifications, Reports, and Records for Halogenated Vent Streams Controlled used to convey or store water containing 63.8070 What notifications must I submit with a Combustion Device the same HAP concentration as and when? Table 15 to Subpart HHHHH—Continuous wastewater. 63.8075 What reports must I submit and Compliance with Emission Limitations (4) Components such as pumps, when? Table 16 to Subpart HHHHH—Continuous compressors, agitators, pressure relief 63.8080 What records must I keep? Compliance with Operating Limits devices, sampling connection systems, 63.8085 In what form and how long must I Table 17 to Subpart HHHHH—Continuous open-ended valves or lines, valves, keep my records? Compliance with Work Practice connectors, and instrumentation Other Requirements and Information Standards Table 18 to Subpart HHHHH—Requirements systems. 63.8090 What compliance options do I have for Reports (5) Ancillary equipment such as waste if part of my plant is subject to both this Table 19 to Subpart HHHHH—Applicability management units and transfer subpart and another subpart? of General Provisions to Subpart operations. 63.8095 What parts of the General HHHHH (c) The requirements for Provisions apply to me? 63.8100 Who implements and enforces this miscellaneous coating manufacturing Subpart HHHHH—National Emission sources in this subpart do not apply to subpart? Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 63.8105 What definitions apply to this operations described in paragraphs subpart? for Miscellaneous Coating (c)(1) through (3) of this section. Manufacturing (1) Research and development Tables to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63 What This Subpart Covers facilities, as defined in section 112(c)(7) Table 1 to Subpart HHHHH—Emission of the CAA. Limitations and Work Practice Standards § 63.7980 What is the purpose of this (2) Ancillary equipment such as for Process Vessels subpart? Table 2 to Subpart HHHHH—Emission boilers and incinerators (only those not Limitations and Work Practice Standards This subpart establishes national used to comply with the emission for Wastewater Streams, Waste emission standards for hazardous air limitations in § 63.8000), chillers and Management Units, and Liquid Streams pollutants (NESHAP) for miscellaneous refrigeration systems, and other in Open Systems Within the coating manufacturing. This subpart equipment that is not directly involved Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing also establishes requirements to in the manufacturing of a coating (i.e., Operations it operates as a closed system, and Table 3 to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63— demonstrate initial and continuous Emission Limitations and Work Practice compliance with the emission materials are not combined with Standards for Storage Tanks limitations and work practice standards. materials used to manufacture the Table 4 to Subpart HHHHH—Work Practice coating). § 63.7985 Am I subject to the requirements Standards for Equipment Leaks, Closed- (3) All equipment associated with a Vent Systems, and Heat Exchange in this subpart? coating process for which the HAP Systems (a) You are subject to the concentration in the process vessel is <5 Table 5 to Subpart HHHHH—Emission requirements in this subpart if you own percent by weight. Limitations and Work Practice Standards or operate miscellaneous coating for Transfer Operations manufacturing operations, as defined in § 63.7990 What parts of my plant does this Table 6 to Subpart HHHHH—Emission paragraph (b) of this section, that meet subpart cover? Limitations for Halogenated Vent the conditions specified in paragraphs (a) This subpart applies to each new, Streams that are Controlled with a reconstructed, or existing miscellaneous Combustion Device (a)(1) through (4) of this section: Table 7 to Subpart HHHHH—Operating (1) Are located at or are part of a coating manufacturing affected source. Limits and Work Practice Standards for major source of hazardous air pollutants (b) The miscellaneous coating Control Devices, Recovery Devices, and (HAP) emissions, as defined in section manufacturing affected source is the Wastewater Treatment Units 112(a) of the CAA; miscellaneous coating manufacturing Table 8 to Subpart HHHHH—Requirements (2) Manufacture coatings, including operations as defined in § 63.7985(b). for Performance Tests inks, paints, or adhesives described by (c) You must consider storage tanks to Table 9 to Subpart HHHHH—Initial SIC codes 285 or 289 or NAICS Code be part of the miscellaneous coating Compliance With Emission Limitations 3255; manufacturing operations if either the and Work Practice Standards for Process input to the storage tank from the Vessels (3) Process, use, or produce HAP; and Table 10 to Subpart HHHHH—Initial (4) Are not part of an affected source coating process vessels (either directly Compliance With Emission Limitations under another subpart of this part 63. or through another storage tank assigned and Work Practice Standards for (b) Miscellaneous coating to the miscellaneous coating Wastewater Streams, Waste Management manufacturing operations include the manufacturing operations) is greater Units, and Liquid Streams in Open facilitywide collection of equipment than or equal to the input from any Systems Within Miscellaneous Coating described in paragraphs (b)(1) through other equipment, or the output from the Manufacturing Operations (5) of this section that is used to storage tank to the coating process Table 11 to Subpart HHHHH—Initial manufacture coatings described in vessels (either directly or through Compliance With Emission Limitations and Work Practice Standards for Storage paragraph (a)(2) of this section. another storage tank assigned to the Tanks Miscellaneous coating manufacturing miscellaneous coating manufacturing Table 12 to Subpart HHHHH—Initial operations also include cleaning operations) is greater than or equal to Compliance With Work Practice operations. the output to any other equipment. If
VerDate 11
the greatest input to and/or output from comply with the requirements for (c) You must either designate a a shared storage tank is the same for existing sources in this subpart upon wastewater stream as an affected both miscellaneous coating startup of the added equipment. wastewater stream or determine that it manufacturing and other uses, you may (d) If you have an area source that is an affected wastewater stream using assign the storage tank to either the increases its emissions or its potential to the procedures specified in § 63.8020. miscellaneous coating manufacturing emit such that it becomes a major source (d) You must meet each operating operations or to the process unit of HAP, you must comply with the limit for control devices, recovery associated with the other uses. If the use requirements in paragraphs (d)(1) and devices, and wastewater treatment units varies from year to year, then you (2) of this section. in Table 7 of this subpart that applies to should base the determination on the (1) Any portion of the existing facility you. utilization that occurred during the year that is a new affected source or a (e) All emission limitations, operating preceding (date of publication of final reconstructed source must be in limits, and work practice standards in rule) or, if the storage tank was not in compliance with the requirements for Tables 1 through 7 of this subpart apply operation during that year, you should new and reconstructed sources in this to new, reconstructed, and existing base the use on the expected use for the subpart upon startup. sources, unless limited to specific first 5-year period after startup. You (2) All other parts of the source must sources within the tables. should include the determination in the be in compliance with the requirements (f) As provided in § 63.6(g), you may Notification of Compliance Status for existing sources in this subpart by apply to EPA for approval to use an specified in § 63.8070. the date 1 year after the date the area alternative to an emission limitation or (d) An affected source is a new source becomes a major source. work practice standard in Tables 1 affected source if you commenced (e) You must meet the notification through 7 of this subpart. construction of the affected source after requirements in § 63.8070 according to (g) Opening of a safety device, as April 4, 2002, and you meet the the schedule in § 63.8070 and in 40 CFR defined in § 63.8105, is allowed at any applicability criteria at the time you part 63, subpart A. Some of the time conditions require it to avoid commenced construction. notifications must be submitted before unsafe conditions. (e) An affected source is reconstructed you are required to comply with the (h) The emission limitations in Table if you commenced reconstruction as emission limitations and work practice 3 of this subpart for control devices defined in § 63.2 after April 4, 2002. standards in this subpart. used to control emissions from storage (f) An affected source is existing if it tanks do not apply during periods of is not new or reconstructed. Emission Limitations and Work planned routine maintenance. Periods Practice Standards of planned routine maintenance of each § 63.7995 When do I have to comply with control device, during which the control this subpart? § 63.8000 What emission limitations and work practice standards must I meet? device does not meet the emission (a) If you have a new or reconstructed limitations specified in Table 3 of this affected source, you must comply with (a) You must meet each emission subpart, must not exceed 240 hours per this subpart according to the limitation and work practice standard in year. requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) and Tables 1 through 6 of this subpart that (2) of this section. applies to you as specified in General Compliance Requirements paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this (1) If you startup your new or § 63.8010 What are my general reconstructed affected source before the section. requirements for complying with this effective date of this subpart, then you (1) Table 1 of this subpart specifies subpart? must comply with the requirements for emission limitations and work practice (a) You must be in compliance with new and reconstructed sources in this standards for process vessels. the emission limitations (including subpart no later than the effective date (2) Table 2 of this subpart specifies operating limits) and the work practice of the subpart. emission limitations and work practice standards in this subpart at all times, (2) If you startup your new or standards for wastewater streams, waste except during periods of startup, reconstructed affected source after the management units, and liquid streams shutdown, and malfunction. effective date of this subpart, then you in open systems within the (b) You must always operate and must comply with the requirements for miscellaneous coating manufacturing maintain your affected source, including new and reconstructed sources in this operations. air pollution control and monitoring subpart upon startup of your affected (3) Table 3 of this subpart specifies equipment, according to the provisions source. emission limitations and work practice in § 63.6(e)(1)(i). (b) If you have an existing affected standards for storage tanks. (1) During the period, if any, between source on the effective date, you must (4) Table 4 of this subpart specifies the compliance date specified for your comply with the requirements for work practice standards for equipment affected source in § 63.7995 and the date existing sources in this subpart no later leaks, closed-vent systems, and heat upon which continuous monitoring than the date 3 years after the effective exchange systems. systems have been installed and date of this subpart. If you add (5) Table 5 of this subpart specifies validated and any applicable operating equipment to your existing affected emission limitations and work practice limits have been set, you must maintain source after the effective date and before standards for transfer operations. a log detailing the operation and the date 3 years after the effective date, (6) Table 6 of this subpart specifies maintenance of the process and you must comply with the requirements emission limitations for halogenated emissions control equipment. for existing sources in this subpart no vent streams that are controlled with a (2) [Reserved]. later than the date 3 years after the combustion device. (c) You must develop and implement effective date of this subpart for the (b) If an emission stream contains a written startup, shutdown, and added equipment. halogen atoms, you must determine malfunction plan (SSMP) according to (c) If you add equipment to your whether it meets the definition of a the provisions in § 63.6(e)(3). existing affected source after the date 3 halogenated stream using the (d) If you use a boiler or process years after the effective date, you must procedures specified in § 63.8015. heater to comply with an emission
VerDate 11
limitation, then the vent stream must be § 63.8020 How do I determine which conduct all initial compliance introduced into the flame zone of the wastewater streams are affected demonstrations prior to the date 1 year boiler or process heater. wastewater streams? after the area source becomes a major (e) After you treat an affected For each wastewater stream that you source. wastewater stream or residual removed generate, you must either designate the (2) For those parts of the source that from an affected wastewater stream, it is wastewater stream as an affected are a new affected source or wastewater stream according to the no longer subject to this subpart. reconstructed source, you must conduct procedures in paragraph (a) of this all initial compliance demonstrations no (f) You are not required to conduct a section, or you must determine whether later than 180 calendar days after performance test or design evaluation the wastewater stream is an affected startup. You must also comply with when you use any of the units specified wastewater stream according to the § 63.7(a)(2) for performance tests. in paragraphs (f)(1) through (4) of this procedures in paragraph (b) of this (d) You must conduct a subsequent section to meet emission limitations section. Each affected wastewater performance test or compliance specified in § 63.8000. You also are stream is subject to the requirements in demonstration equivalent to an initial exempt from the continuous Table 2 of this subpart. compliance demonstration within 180 compliance, recordkeeping, and (a) You may designate any wastewater days of a change in the worst-case reporting requirements specified in stream to be an affected wastewater conditions. §§ 63.8045 through 63.8085 for any of stream. You do not have to determine these units. This exemption applies to the concentration for any designated § 63.8030 What performance tests, design units used as control devices or affected wastewater stream. evaluations, and other procedures must I wastewater treatment units. (b) For wastewater streams that you use? (1) A hazardous waste incinerator that do not designate as affected wastewater (a) You must conduct each has been issued a final permit under 40 streams, you must use the procedures performance test, design evaluation, and CFR part 270 and that complies with the specified in § 63.144(b) to establish the other procedure in Tables 9 through 14 requirements of 40 CFR part 264, concentrations, except as specified in of this subpart that applies to you. subpart O, or that has certified paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this (b) When you are required to calculate compliance with the interim status section. uncontrolled emissions from batch requirements of 40 CFR part 265, (1) The phrase ‘‘Group 1 wastewater vents according to § 63.1257(d)(2)(i), use subpart O; stream’’ in § 63.144 means ‘‘affected any applicable option except you may wastewater stream’’ for the purposes of not calculate emissions from heating (2) A boiler or process heater with a this subpart. using Equation 13 of subpart GGG of design heat input capacity of 44 (2) The phrase ‘‘Group 2 wastewater this part or emissions from megawatts (150 million British thermal stream’’ means any wastewater stream depressurization using the procedures units per hour) or greater; that is not an affected wastewater stream in § 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(C)(1) through (4). (3) A boiler or process heater into for the purposes of this subpart. (c) Requirements for performance which the vent stream is introduced (3) References to ‘‘Table 8 tests. Each performance test must be with the primary fuel or is used as the compounds’’ in § 63.144 do not apply conducted according to the primary fuel; or for the purposes of this subpart. requirements in § 63.7(e)(1), except that (4) A boiler or process heater burning § 63.8025 By what date must I conduct performance tests for HAP from process hazardous waste that meets the performance tests or other initial vessels must be conducted according to requirements in paragraph (f)(4)(i) or (ii) compliance demonstrations? paragraph (c)(3) of this section and not of this section: (a) If you have an existing affected under normal operating conditions as (i) The boiler or process heater has source on the effective date of this specified in § 63.7(e)(1). Performance been issued a final permit under 40 CFR subpart, you must conduct all initial tests also must be conducted using the part 270 and complies with the compliance demonstrations required in methods and procedures specified in requirements of 40 CFR part 266, Tables 9 through 14 of this subpart that Table 8 of this subpart and in subpart H; or apply to you prior to the date 3 years paragraphs (c)(1) through (12) of this (ii) The boiler or process heater has after the effective date. section. (1) You may not conduct performance certified compliance with the interim (b) If you have a new affected source tests during periods of startup, status requirements of 40 CFR part 266, or a reconstructed source, you must shutdown, or malfunction, as specified subpart H. conduct all initial compliance demonstrations required in Tables 9 in § 63.7(e)(1). Testing and Initial Compliance through 14 of this subpart that apply to (2) When you conduct a performance Requirements you no later than 180 calendar days test for a control device used to control after the applicable compliance date emissions from process vessels, you § 63.8015 How do I determine whether vent must conduct the test according to streams are halogenated? specified in § 63.7995(a). You must also comply with § 63.7(a)(2) for § 63.1257(b)(8). To determine whether an emission performance tests. (3) When you conduct a performance stream from a process vessel, waste (c) If you have an area source that test for a wastewater treatment unit or management unit, or transfer operation increases its emissions or its potential to control device, you must conduct the is halogenated, you must calculate the emit such that it becomes a major test according to § 63.145. concentration of each organic- source, you must conduct all initial (4) You do not have to conduct a containing halogen atoms in accordance compliance demonstrations required in performance test for any condenser, but with § 63.115(d)(2)(v)(A), multiply each Tables 9 through 14 of this subpart that you must have the results of continuous concentration by the applicable number apply to you in accordance with the direct measurement of the condenser of halogen atoms in the organic schedule specified in paragraphs (c)(1) outlet gas temperature either for use in compound, and sum the resulting and (2) of this section. determining concentrations as part of halogen atom concentrations associated (1) For those parts of the source that the design evaluation specified in with each organic compound. are an existing affected source, you must paragraph (d) of this section or for
VerDate 11
demonstrating initial compliance with of the control device as specified in (B) Because of the high efficiency of the work practice standard for process Table 8 of this subpart, you must the control device, the anticipated vessels according to entry 5. in Table 9 conduct the performance test using the TGNMO concentration at the control of this subpart. procedures in paragraphs (c)(7)(i) and device exhaust is 50 ppmv or less, (5) If you elect to use Method 18 of (ii) of this section. regardless of the inlet concentration. 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, or ASTM (i) For a combustion control device, (ii) Using the TGNMO concentration D6420–99 (incorporated by reference as you must first determine which HAP are from Method 25 or the TOC specified in § 63.14), to measure the present in the inlet gas stream using concentration from method 25A, percent reduction of HAP as specified in process knowledge or the screening calculate the emission rate of TOC Table 8 of this subpart, you must procedure described in Method 18. In (ETOC) in the inlet and outlet vent conduct the performance test using the conducting the performance test, streams according to paragraph (c)(6)(iii) procedures in paragraphs (c)(5)(i) analyze samples collected at the outlet of this section. through (iii) of this section. of the combustion control device as (iii) Calculate the percent reduction in (i) In conducting the performance test, specified in Method 18 or ASTM TOC according to paragraph (c)(6)(iv) of collect and analyze samples collected as D6420–99 for the HAP compounds this section. specified in Method 18 or ASTM present at the inlet of the control device. (10) You must use Method 26 in D6420–99. You must collect samples (ii) The total HAP concentration appendix A to 40 CFR part 60 to simultaneously at the inlet and outlet of (CHAP) is the sum of the concentrations measure hydrogen halide and halogen the combustion device. If the of the individual HAP components and concentrations as specified in Table 8 of performance test is for a combustion must be computed for each run using this subpart, and you must conduct the control device, you must first determine the equation in § 63.115(c)(3)(ii). performance test using the procedures which HAP are present in the inlet gas (8) If you elect to use Method 25A of in paragraphs (c)(10)(i) and (ii) of this stream (i.e., uncontrolled emissions) 40 CFR part 60, appendix A to measure section. using process knowledge or the the TOC concentration of the outlet vent (i) Use a minimum sampling time of screening procedure described in stream as specified in Table 8 of this 1 hour. Method 18. Quantify the emissions for subpart, you must conduct the (ii) Use Method 26A in lieu of Method the HAP present in the inlet gas stream performance test using the procedures 26 when measuring emissions at the for both the inlet and outlet gas streams in paragraphs (c)(8)(i) through (iii) of outlet of a scrubber where the potential for the combustion device. this section. for mist carryover exists. (11) You may use ASTM D6420–99 (ii) Calculate the concentration and (i) Calibrate the instrument on the (incorporated by reference as specified emission rate of total organic HAP predominant HAP. in § 63.14) in lieu of Method 18 of 40 (EHAP) in the inlet and outlet vent (ii) Conduct the performance test in CFR part 60, appendix A, under the streams using the equations in accordance with paragraphs (c)(8)(ii)(A) conditions specified in paragraphs §§ 63.115(c)(3)(ii) and 63.116(c)(4)(ii). and (B) of this section: (c)(11)(i) through (iii) of this section. (iii) Calculate the percent reduction in (A) The results are acceptable if the total organic HAP using the equation in (i) If the target compound(s) is listed response from the high level calibration in Table 1.1 of ASTM D6420–99 and the § 63.116(c)(4)(iii). gas is at least 20 times the standard (6) If you elect to use Method 25A of target concentration is between 150 deviation for the response from the zero 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, to parts per billion by volume and 100 calibration gas when the instrument is determine the percent reduction ppmv. zeroed on its most sensitive scale; and efficiency of a vent stream controlled in (ii) If the target compound(s) is not (B) The span value of the analyzer a noncombustion device as specified in listed in Section 1.1 of ASTM D6420– must be less than 100 parts per million Table 8 of this subpart, you must 99, but is potentially detected by mass volume (ppmv). conduct the performance test in spectrometry, an additional system accordance with paragraphs (c)(6)(i) (iii) Report the results as carbon, continuing calibration check after each through (iv) of this section. calculated according to equation 25A–1 run, as detailed in Section 10.5.3 of (i) Calibrate the instrument on the of Method 25A. ASTM D6420–99, must be followed, predominant HAP. (9) If you elect to use Method 25 of met, documented, and submitted with (ii) The results are acceptable if the 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, to the performance test report even if you response from the high level calibration determine the percent reduction of TOC do not use a moisture condenser or the gas is at least 20 times the standard of a vent stream controlled in a compound is not considered soluble. deviation for the response from the zero combustion device as specified in Table (iii) If a minimum of one sample/ calibration gas when the instrument is 8 of this subpart, you must conduct the analysis cycle is completed at least zeroed on its most sensitive scale. performance test using procedures in every 15 minutes. (iii) Calculate the inlet and outlet paragraphs (c)(9)(i) through (iii) of this (12) Three test runs are required for concentrations of total organic section. each performance test. compound (TOC) per Section 8 of (i) Measure the total gaseous non- (d) Design evaluation. When you Method 25A. Calculate the emission rate methane organic (TGNMO) conduct a design evaluation, you must of total organic compound (ETOC) in the concentration of the inlet and outlet follow the procedures in § 63.1257(a)(1). inlet and outlet vent streams using the vent streams using the procedures of The design evaluation must also include equation in § 63.115(c)(4)(ii). Method 25, except that you may use the value(s) and basis for the operating (iv) Calculate the percent reduction in Method 25A in lieu of method 25 if limit(s) to be monitored as specified in TOC using the equation in either condition in paragraph (c)(9)(i)(A) Table 7 of this subpart. § 63.116(c)(4)(iii). or (B) of this section is met. (e) Establishing operating limits (7) If you elect to use Method 18 of (A) The concentration at the inlet to during performance tests. During the 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, or ASTM the control system and the required period of each performance test D6420–99 (incorporated by reference as level of control are such to result in conducted according to paragraph (c)(2) specified in § 63.14), to measure the exhaust TGNMO concentrations of 50 of this section for any type of control total concentration of HAP at the outlet ppmv or less. device listed in Table 7 of this subpart,
VerDate 11
you must collect operating parameter measure the same parameter(s) that is Ca = corrected outlet TOC, organic HAP, monitoring system data, average the required for control devices that control and hydrogen halides and halogens operating parameter data over the test inlet HAP emissions equal to or greater concentration, dry basis, ppmv; period, determine the operating limit(s) than 1 ton/yr as specified in Table 7 of Cm = actual TOC, organic HAP, and to be monitored for that control device, this subpart. If the parameter will not be hydrogen halides and halogens and set limits according to paragraphs measured continuously, you must concentration measured at control (e)(1) and (2) of this section. You may request approval of your proposed device outlet, dry basis, ppmv; also elect to establish additional procedure in the Precompliance report. Qa = total volumetric flow rate of all gas operating limit(s) for conditions other You must identify the operating limit(s) streams vented to the control than those under which the and the measurement frequency, and device, except supplemental gases; performance test was conducted as you must provide rationale to support Qs = total volumetric flow rate of specified in paragraph (e)(3) of this how these measurements demonstrate supplemental gases. section. the control device is operating properly. (h) Combination of process vessels (1) If the operating limit to be (g) Outlet concentration correction for established is a maximum, it must be with other vents. If other vents are supplemental gases—(1) Combustion manifolded with vents from process based on the average of the values for devices. If you use a combustion device each of the three test runs. vessels, you must demonstrate initial to comply with an outlet concentration compliance for the other vents either as (2) If the operating limit to be emission limitation, you must correct established is a minimum, it must be part of the initial compliance the actual TOC, organic HAP, and demonstration for the process vessels, or based on the average of the values for hydrogen halide and halogen each of the three test runs. you must conduct multiple concentrations to 3 percent oxygen if demonstrations (one for the process (3) If you elect to establish additional you add supplemental gases, as defined operating limits, you must comply with vessels, and one or more for the other in § 63.8105, to the vent stream or vents). the requirements specified in paragraph manifold. You must use the integrated (e)(3)(i) of this section and, if applicable, sampling and analysis procedures of § 63.8035 What are my monitoring paragraph (e)(3)(ii) of this section. Method 3A 3B of 40 CFR part 60, installation, operation, and maintenance (i) The additional operating limits appendix A, to determine the actual requirements? may be based on the results of the oxygen concentration (%0 ). You must performance test and supplementary 2d (a) Each continuous emissions take samples during the same time that information such as engineering monitoring system (CEMS) must be you take the TOC or total organic HAP assessments and manufacturer’s installed, operated, and maintained or hydrogen halides and halogen recommendations. These limits may be according to the requirements in samples. Use Equation 1 of this section established for conditions as unique as paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this to correct the concentration to 3 percent emission episodes for individual section. For any CEMS meeting process vessels that are manifolded to a oxygen (Cc): Performance Specification 8, you must common control device. You must also comply with Appendix F, 17. 9 procedure 1 of 40 CFR part 60. provide rationale in the Precompliance CC= ()Eq. 1 cm − (1) Each CEMS must be installed, report for the specific level for each 20.% 9 O2d operating limit, including any data and operated, and maintained according to calculations used to develop the limit Where: the applicable Performance and a description of why the limit Cc = concentration of TOC or total Specification of 40 CFR part 60, indicates proper operation of the control organic HAP or hydrogen halide appendix B and according to paragraph device. The procedures provided in this and halogen corrected to 3 percent (a)(2) of this section, except as specified paragraph (e)(3)(i) have not been oxygen, dry basis, ppmv; in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section. approved by the Administrator and Cm = total concentration of TOC or total (i) If you wish to use a CEMS other determination of the operating limit organic HAP or hydrogen halide than a fourier transform infrared using these procedures is subject to and halogen in vented gas stream, spectroscopy (FTIR) meeting the review and approval by the average of samples, dry basis, requirements of Performance Administrator. ppmv; Specification 15 to measure hydrogen (ii) If you elect to establish separate %02d = concentration of oxygen chloride (HCl) before we promulgate a monitoring levels for different emission measured in vented gas stream, dry Performance Specification for such episodes from process vessels, you must basis, percent by volume. CEMS, you must prepare a monitoring maintain records in your daily schedule (2) Noncombustion devices. If you use plan and submit it for approval in or log of operation indicating each point a control device other than a accordance with the procedures at which you change from one operating combustion device to comply with a specified in § 63.8. limit to another, even if the duration of TOC, organic HAP, or hydrogen halide (ii) [Reserved]. the monitoring for an operating limit is outlet concentration emission (2) You must determine the less than 15 minutes. You must limitation, you must correct the actual calibration gases and reporting units for maintain a daily schedule or log of concentration for supplemental gases TOC CEMS in accordance with operation according to § 63.8080(a)(5). using Equation 2 of this section; you paragraph (a)(2)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this (f) Periodic verification. For a control may use process knowledge and section. device with total inlet HAP emissions representative operating data to (i) For CEMS meeting Performance less than 1 ton/yr, you must establish an determine the fraction of the total flow Specification 9 or 15 requirements, operating limit(s) for a parameter(s) that due to supplemental gas: determine the target analyte(s) for you will measure and record at least calibration using either process once per averaging period (i.e., daily or QQ+ knowledge of the control device inlet CC= sa ()Eq. 2 block, as defined in § 63.8035(a)(5) or am Q stream or the screening procedures of (b)(3)) to verify that the control device a Method 18 on the control device inlet is operating properly. You may elect to Where: stream.
VerDate 11
(ii) For CEMS meeting Performance the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) (1) Locate the flow sensor and other Specification 8 used to monitor through (4) of this section. necessary equipment such as performance of a combustion device, (1) The CPMS must complete a straightening vanes in a position that calibrate the instrument on the minimum of one cycle of operation for provides a representative flow. predominant HAP and report the results each successive 15-minute period. You (2) Use a flow sensor with a minimum as carbon (C1), and use Method 25A, or must have a minimum of four tolerance of 2 percent of the flow rate. any approved alternative as the successive cycles of operation to have a (3) Reduce swirling flow or abnormal reference method for the relative valid hour of data. velocity distributions due to upstream accuracy tests. (2) Have valid data from at least 75 and downstream disturbances. (iii) For CEMS meeting Performance percent of the hours during the (4) Conduct a flow sensor calibration Specification 8 used to monitor averaging period. check at least semiannually. performance of a noncombustion (3) Determine the average of all (5) At least monthly, inspect all device, determine the predominant HAP recorded readings associated with each components for integrity, all electrical using either process knowledge or the operating limit for each operating day or connections for continuity, and all screening procedures of Method 18 on operating block. An operating block is a mechanical connections for leakage. the control device inlet stream, calibrate period of time that is equal to the time (e) For each pressure measurement the monitor on the predominant HAP, from the beginning to end of an device, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (b) and (e)(1) through (7) and report the results as C1. Use Method operation in a process vessel. 18, ASTM D6420–99, or any approved (4) Record the results of each of this section. (1) Locate the pressure sensor(s) in or alternative as the reference method for inspection, calibration, and validation as close to a position that provides a the relative accuracy tests, and report check. (c) For each temperature monitoring representative measurement of the the results as carbon (C1). device, you must meet the requirements pressure. (3) You must conduct a performance (2) Minimize or eliminate pulsating evaluation of each CEMS according to in paragraphs (b) and (c)(1) through (8) of this section. pressure, vibration, and internal and the requirements in 40 CFR 63.8 and external corrosion. according to the applicable Performance (1) Locate the temperature sensor in a position that provides a representative (3) Use a gauge with a minimum Specification of 40 CFR part 60, tolerance of 0.5 inch of water or a appendix B, except as specified in temperature. (2) For a noncryogenic temperature transducer with a minimum tolerance of paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section. range, use a temperature sensor with a 1 percent of the pressure range. (i) If you have an existing source, the minimum tolerance of 2.2° C or 0.75 (4) Check pressure tap pluggage daily. requirement in § 63.8(e)(4) to conduct percent of the temperature value, (5) Using a manometer, check gauge the performance evaluation not later whichever is larger. calibration quarterly and transducer than 180 days after the compliance date (3) For a cryogenic temperature range, calibration monthly. does not apply for the purposes of this use a temperature sensor with a (6) Conduct calibration checks any subpart. In this situation, you must minimum tolerance of 2.2° C or 2 time the sensor exceeds the conduct the performance evaluation for percent of the temperature value, manufacturer’s specified maximum the CEMS prior to the compliance date, whichever is larger. operating pressure range or install a new and you must submit the results to the (4) Shield the temperature sensor pressure sensor. Administrator in the Notification of system from electromagnetic (7) At least monthly, inspect all Compliance Status. interference and chemical components for integrity, all electrical (ii) [Reserved]. contaminants. connections for continuity, and all (4) As specified in § 63.8(c)(4)(ii), (5) If a chart recorder is used, it must mechanical connections for leakage. each CEMS must complete a minimum have a sensitivity in the minor division (f) For each pH measurement device, of one cycle of operation (sampling, of at least 11° C. you must meet the requirements in analyzing, and data recording) for each (6) Perform an electronic calibration paragraphs (b) and (f)(1) through (4) of successive 15-minute period. at least semiannually according to the this section. (5) The CEMS data must be reduced procedures in the manufacturer’s (1) Locate the pH sensor in a position to operating day or operating block owners manual. Following the that provides a representative averages computed using valid data electronic calibration, you must conduct measurement of pH. (2) Ensure the sample is properly from at least 75 percent of the hours a temperature sensor validation check in mixed and representative of the fluid to during the averaging period. To have a which a second or redundant be measured. valid hour of data, you must have four temperature sensor placed nearby the (3) Check the pH meter’s calibration or more data points equally spaced over process temperature sensor must yield a on at least two points every 8 hours of the 1-hour period (or at least two data reading within 16.7° C of the process process operation. points during an hour when calibration, temperature sensor’s reading. quality assurance, or maintenance (4) At least monthly, inspect all (7) Conduct calibration and validation components for integrity and all activities are being performed). An checks any time the sensor exceeds the operating block is a period of time from electrical connections for continuity. manufacturer’s specified maximum (g) If flow to a control device could be the beginning to end of a batch process. operating temperature range or install a intermittent, you must install, calibrate, Operating block averages may be used new temperature sensor. and operate a flow indicator at the inlet only for batch processes. (8) At least monthly, inspect all or outlet of the control device to identify (6) If you add supplemental gases, you components for integrity and all periods of no flow. must correct the measured electrical connections for continuity, concentrations in accordance with oxidation, and galvanic corrosion. § 63.8040 How do I demonstrate initial § 63.8030(g). (d) For each flow measurement compliance with the emission limitations (b) You must install, operate, and device, you must meet the requirements and work practice standards? maintain each continuous parameter in paragraphs (b) and (d)(1) through (5) (a) You must demonstrate initial monitoring system (CPMS) according to of this section. compliance with each emission
VerDate 11
limitation and work practice standard operate in accordance with the startup, paragraphs (b)(1) through (6) of this that applies to you according to Tables shutdown, and malfunction plan. section. 9 through 14 of this subpart. (d) Consistent with §§ 63.6(e) and (1) Install and begin to operate and (b) You must establish each site- 63.7(e)(1), deviations that occur during maintain each CEMS in accordance with specific operating limit in Table 7 of a period of startup, shutdown, or paragraph (c) of this section no later this subpart that applies to you malfunction are not violations if you than the date 3 years after the effective according to the requirements in demonstrate to the Administrator’s date of this subpart. § 63.8030(d), (e), or (f). satisfaction that you were operating in (2) Conduct a performance evaluation (c) You must submit the Notification accordance with the SSMP. The of the CEMS as specified in of Compliance Status containing the Administrator will determine whether § 63.8035(a)(3). results of the initial compliance deviations that occur during a period of (3) Submit the results of any demonstration according to the startup, shutdown, or malfunction are requirements in § 63.8070(e). determination of the target analytes or violations, according to the provisions predominant HAP in the Notification of Continuous Compliance Requirements in § 63.6(e). Compliance Status. § 63.8045 How do I monitor and collect Alternative Means of Compliance (4) If you add supplemental gases to the vent stream or manifold, determine data to demonstrate continuous § 63.8055 How do I comply with the compliance? alternative standard? either the oxygen concentration (if you use a combustion device) or both the (a) You must monitor and collect data As an alternative to complying with according to this section. total vent stream and supplemental gas the emission limitations and work stream flow rates (if you use a (b) Except for monitor malfunctions, practice standards for process vessels associated repairs, and required quality noncombustion device), and calculate and storage tanks in Tables 1 and 2 of the ratio in Equation 1 or 2 of § 63.8030 assurance or control activities this subpart, you may comply with the (including, as applicable, calibration to use in correcting the measured emission limitations in paragraph (a) of concentrations for supplemental gases. checks and required zero and span this section and demonstrate initial and (5) If you elect to comply with the adjustments), you must monitor continuous compliance in accordance requirement to reduce hydrogen halides continuously (or collect data at all with the requirements in paragraphs (b) and halogens by ≥95 percent by weight required intervals) at all times that the and (c) of this section. Reporting and in paragraph (a)(1)(i)(C) of this section, affected source is operating. recordkeeping requirements are you must demonstrate initial (c) You must not use data recorded specified in §§ 63.8075 and 63.8080. compliance by conducting a during monitoring malfunctions, (a) Emission limitations and work performance test and setting a site- associated repairs, required quality practice standards. (1) You must route specific operating limit(s) for the assurance or control activities, and vent streams through a closed-vent scrubber in accordance with Table 14 of periods of no flow in data averages and system to a control device that reduces this subpart. The applicable operating calculations used to report emission or HAP emissions as specified in either limits are specified in Table 7 of this operating levels, nor may such data be paragraph (a)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section. subpart. You must submit the results of used in fulfilling a minimum data (i) If you use a combustion control the initial compliance demonstration in availability requirement. You must use device, it must reduce HAP emissions as the Notification of Compliance Status. all of the data you collected during all specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i)(A), (B), other periods in assessing the operation and (C) of this section. (6) Comply with the requirements for of the control device and associated (A) To an outlet TOC concentration of closed-vent systems in entries (c) and control system. 20 ppmv or less. (d) of Table 12 of this subpart. § 63.8050 How do I demonstrate (B) To an outlet concentration of (c) Continuous compliance continuous compliance with the emission hydrogen halides and halogens of 20 requirements. You demonstrate limitations and work practice standards? ppmv or less. continuous compliance with the (a) You must demonstrate continuous (C) As an alternative to paragraph emission limitations in paragraph (a) of compliance with each emission (a)(1)(i)(B) of this section, if you control this section according to the limitation and work practice standard in halogenated vent streams emitted from requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) Tables 1 through 7 of this subpart that a combustion device followed by a through (7) of this section. applies to you according to methods scrubber, you may reduce the hydrogen (1) Except as specified in paragraphs specified in Tables 15, 16, and 17 of this halides and halogens generated in the (c)(1)(iii) and (iv) of this section, you subpart. combustion device by ≥95 percent by must install, operate, and maintain (b) You must report each instance in weight in the scrubber and establish CEMS to measure TOC and total which you did not meet the operating parameters for the scrubber in hydrogen halide and halogen requirements in Tables 15 and 16 of this accordance with Table 7 of this subpart. concentrations in accordance with subpart that apply to you. This includes (ii) If you use a noncombustion paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii) of this periods of startup, shutdown and control device, it must reduce HAP section and in accordance with malfunction. You must also report each emissions to an outlet total organic § 63.8035(a)(1), (2), and (4), and you instance in which you did not meet the concentration of 50 ppmv or less, and must reduce the CEMS data as specified requirements in Table 17 of this subpart an outlet concentration of hydrogen in § 63.8035(a)(5). If you add that apply to you. These instances are halides and halogens of 50 ppmv or less. supplemental gases to the vent stream or deviations from the emission limitations (2) You must comply with the work manifold, you must correct measured and work practice standards in this practice standards for closed-vent concentrations for supplemental gases subpart. These deviations must be systems in Table 4 of this subpart. or monitor other operating parameters reported according to the requirements (b) Initial compliance requirements. as specified in paragraph (c)(7) of this in § 63.8075(d). You demonstrate initial compliance section. The reduced results must be (c) During periods of startup, with the alternative standard if you below the concentration limits specified shutdown, and malfunction, you must comply with the requirements in in paragraph (a) of this section.
VerDate 11
(i) Install CEMS to measure TOC in specified in § 63.8030(g) or comply with Notification of Compliance Status, and accordance with paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A) the requirements of paragraph (c)(7)(i) recalculated values must be included in or (B) of this section. or (ii) of this section. If you correct for the next compliance report after each (A) For noncombustion devices, supplemental gases as specified in recalculation. For all calculations after install a CEMS that meets Performance § 63.8030(g)(2) for noncombustion the initial calculation, to use emissions Specification 8, 9, or 15. control devices, you must evaluate the inventory data calculated using (B) For combustion devices, install a flow rates as specified in paragraph procedures other than those specified in CEMS that meets Performance (c)(7)(iii) of this section. § 63.1257(d), you must submit the Specification 8 and report the results as (i) Provisions for combustion devices. emissions inventory data calculations C1. As an alternative to correcting for and rationale for their use in the (ii) Install CEMS to measure total supplemental gases as specified in Precompliance report, Notification of hydrogen halide and halogen § 63.8030(g), you must monitor Process Change report, or an application concentrations in accordance with residence time and firebox temperature for a Part 70 permit renewal or revision. paragraph (c)(1)(ii)(A) or (B) of this according to the requirements of (C) In the Notification of Compliance section: paragraphs (c)(7)(i)(A) and (B) of this Status, you may elect to establish both (A) Install a CEMS that meets section. Monitoring of residence time a maximum daily average operating Performance Specification 15 to may be accomplished by monitoring flowrate limit above the flowrate measure HCl; or flowrate into the combustion chamber. setpoint and a reduced outlet (B) If you wish to measure HCl using (A) If complying with the alternative concentration limit corresponding to a CEMS for which we have not standard instead of complying with an this flowrate limit. You may also promulgated performance emission limitation of 95 percent or establish reduced outlet concentration specifications, you must prepare a less, you must maintain a minimum limits for any daily average flowrates monitoring plan and submit it for residence time of 0.5 seconds and a between the flowrate setpoint and the approval in accordance with the minimum combustion chamber flowrate limit. The correlation between procedures specified in § 63.8. temperature of 760°C. these elevated flowrates and the (iii) You do not need to monitor the (B) If complying with the alternative corresponding outlet concentration hydrogen halide and halogen standard instead of complying with an limits must be established using concentrations if, based on process emission limitation of 98 percent or Equation 2 of this section: knowledge, you determine that the less, you must maintain a minimum Q emission stream does not contain residence time of 0.75 seconds and a C =×set 50()Eq. 2 hydrogen halides or halogens. minimum combustion chamber a Qlim (iv) If you elect to comply with the temperature of 816°C. requirement to reduce hydrogen halides (ii) Provisions for dense gas systems. Where: and halogens by ≥95 percent by weight As an alternative to correcting for Ca = adjusted outlet concentration limit, in paragraph (a)(1)(i)(C) of this section, supplemental gases as specified in dry basis, ppmv; you must comply with the requirements § 63.8030(g), for noncombustion devices 50 = outlet concentration limit in paragraphs (c)(1)(iv)(A) through (C) of used to control emissions from dense associated with the flowrate this section. gas systems, as defined in § 63.8105, setpoint, dry basis, ppmv; (A) Install, operate, and maintain you must monitor flowrate as specified Qset = system flowrate setpoint, scfm; CPMS for the scrubber as specified in in paragraphs (c)(7)(ii)(A) through (D) of Qlim = actual system flowrate limit, § 63.8035(b) through (f), as applicable. this section. scfm. (B) Collect and reduce CPMS data for (A) Use Equation 1 of this section to (D) You must install and operate a the scrubber in accordance with the calculate the system flowrate setpoint at monitoring system for measuring system requirements specified in entry 5., 6., or which the average concentration is flowrate. The flowrate into the control 7. of Table 16 of this subpart, as 5,000 ppmv TOC: device must be monitored and recorded applicable. at least once every hour. The system 721× E flowrate must be calculated as the (C) Maintain the daily or block Q = an ()Eq. 1 average CPMS levels within the ranges set 5, 000 average of all values measured during established during the initial each 24-hour operating day. The Where: performance test. flowrate monitoring sensor must have a (2) You must install, calibrate, and Qset = system flowrate setpoint, scfm; minimum tolerance of 2 percent of the operate a flow indicator as specified in Ean = annual emissions entering the system flowrate setpoint, and the § 63.8035(g). control device, lbmoles/yr. flowrate monitoring device must be (3) You must monitor and collect data (B) Annual emissions used in calibrated at least semi-annually. according to § 63.8045(b) and (c). Equation 1 of this section must be based (iii) Flow rate evaluation for (4) You must demonstrate continuous on the actual mass of organic noncombustion devices. To demonstrate compliance with the work practice compounds entering the control device, continuous compliance with the standards for closed-vent systems as as calculated from the most requirement to correct for supplemental specified in entries (h) and (i) in Table representative emissions inventory data gases as specified in § 63.8030(g)(2) for 17 of this subpart. that you submitted within the 5 years noncombustion devices, you must (5) You must report each deviation before the Notification of Compliance evaluate the volumetric flow rate of according to § 63.8050(b). Status is due. You must recalculate the supplemental gases, Qs, and the (6) You must comply with the startup, system flowrate setpoint once every 5 volumetric flow rate of all gases, Qa, shutdown, and malfunction years using the annual emissions from each time a new operating scenario is requirements in § 63.8050(c) and (d). the most representative emissions implemented based on process (7) Correction for supplemental gases. inventory data submitted during the 5- knowledge and representative operating If you add supplemental gases to the year period after the previous data. The procedures used to evaluate vents or manifolds, you must either calculation. Results of the initial the flow rates, and the resulting correct for supplemental gases as calculation must be included in the correction factor used in Equation 2 of
VerDate 11
§ 63.8030, must be included in the submit an Initial Notification not later operating limits established during the Notification of Compliance Status and than 120 calendar days after the initial compliance demonstrations, in the next compliance report submitted effective date of the subpart. including data and calculations to after an operating scenario change. (c) As specified in § 63.9(b)(3), if you support the levels you establish. startup your new or reconstructed (iv) Listing of all operating scenarios. § 63.8060 How do I conduct emissions affected source on or after the effective (v) Descriptions of worst-case averaging for process vessels? date, you must submit an Initial operating and/or testing conditions for Emissions averaging is allowed for Notification not later than 120 calendar control devices. process mixing vessels only. For an days after you become subject to this (vi) Identification of emission points existing source, you may elect to subpart. subject to overlapping requirements comply with the emission limitations (d) If you are required to conduct a described in § 63.8057 and the authority for process mixing vessels in Tables 1 performance test, you must submit a under which you will comply. through 4 of this subpart by complying notification of intent to conduct a (vii) The information specified in with the emission averaging provisions performance test at least 60 calendar § 63.1039(a)(1) through (3) for each for storage tanks in §§ 63.1250 through days before the performance test is process subject to the work practice 63.1260. scheduled to begin as required in standards for equipment leaks in Table § 63.7(b)(1). 4 of this subpart. § 63.8065 How may I transfer wastewater (e) If you are required to conduct a to a treatment unit that I do not own or (viii) If you are complying with the operate? performance test, design evaluation, or vapor balancing work practice standard other initial compliance demonstration (a) You may elect to transfer an for storage tanks, include a statement to as specified in Tables 9 through 14 of affected wastewater stream or a residual that effect and a statement that the this subpart, you must submit a removed from an affected wastewater pressure vent setting on the storage tank Notification of Compliance Status stream to an on-site treatment operation is equal to or greater than 2.5 pounds according to the schedule in paragraphs that you do not own or operate, or to an per square inch gauge, as specified in (e)(1) and (2) of this section, and the off-site treatment operation, according Table 11 of this subpart. Notification of Compliance Status must (f)(1) Except as specified in paragraph to the requirements in § 63.132(g), include the information specified in (f)(2) of this section, whenever you except as specified in paragraphs (a)(1) paragraph (e)(3) of this section. make a process change, or change any through (4) of this section. (1) For an existing source in operation (1) If you send wastewater offsite for of the information submitted in the on the effective date, you must submit Notification of Compliance Status, you biological treatment, the waste the Notification of Compliance Status management units up to the activated must submit a report quarterly. For the no later than the compliance date purposes of this section, a process sludge unit must be covered, or you specified in § 63.7995(b). For parts of an must demonstrate that less than 5 change means the startup of a new area source that become a major source process, as defined in § 63.8105. You percent of the total HAP on list 1 in and an existing affected source, you § 63.145(h) is emitted from these units. may submit the notification as part of must submit the Notification of the compliance report required under (2) References in § 63.132(g) to Compliance Status no later than the ‘‘Group 1’’ wastewater mean ‘‘affected’’ § 63.8070(d). The notification must compliance date specified in include all of the information in wastewater for the purposes of this § 63.2445(d)(2). subpart. paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through (iv) of this (2) If you have a new source, section. (3) The references in § 63.132(g)(2) to reconstructed source, or parts of a ‘‘§§ 63.133 through 63.147’’ and in (i) A brief description of the process former area source that are a new change. § 63.132(g)(1)(ii) to ‘‘provisions of this source, you must submit the subpart’’ (i.e., subpart G) refer to (ii) A description of any modifications Notification of Compliance Status no to standard procedures or quality §§ 63.8000 through 63.8050, 63.8075, later than 240 days after the applicable and 63.8080 for the purposes of this assurance procedures. compliance date specified in (iii) Revisions to any of the subpart. § 63.7995(a) or (d)(1). information reported in the original (4) The reference in § 63.132(g)(2) to (3) The Notification of Compliance ‘‘§ 63.102(b) of subpart F’’ does not Notification of Compliance Status under Status must include the information in paragraph (e) of this section. apply for the purposes of this subpart. paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (viii) of this (b) You must keep a record of the (iv) Information required by the section. Notification of Compliance Status under notice sent to the treatment operator (i) The results of any applicability stating that the wastewater stream or paragraph (e) of this section for changes determinations, emission calculations, involving the addition of processes or residual contains organic HAP which or analyses used to identify and are required to be managed and treated equipment. quantify HAP emissions from the (2) You must submit a report 60 days in accordance with the provisions of affected source. before the scheduled implementation this subpart. (ii) The results of emissions profiles, date of either of the changes identified Notification, Reports, and Records performance tests, engineering analyses, in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) or (ii) of this design evaluations, flare compliance section. § 63.8070 What notifications must I submit assessments, inspections and repairs, (i) Any change in the activity covered and when? and calculations used to demonstrate by the Precompliance report. (a) You must submit all of the initial compliance according to Tables 9 (ii) A change in the status of a control notifications in §§ 63.6(h)(4) and (5), through 14 of this subpart. For device from small to large. 63.7(b) and (c), 63.8(e), 63.8(f)(4) and performance tests, results must include (6), 63.9(b) through (h) that apply to you descriptions of sampling and analysis § 63.8075 What reports must I submit and by the dates specified. procedures and quality assurance when? (b) As specified in § 63.9(b)(2), if you procedures. (a) You must submit each report in startup your affected source before the (iii) Descriptions of monitoring Table 18 of this subpart that applies to effective date of the subpart, you must devices, monitoring frequencies, and the you.
VerDate 11
(b) Unless the Administrator has (2) Descriptions of daily or per batch (C) Operating logs and operating approved a different schedule for demonstrations to verify that control scenarios. submission of reports under § 63.10(a), devices subject to entry 8. on Table 7 of (iii) For each deviation from an you must submit each report by the date this subpart are operating as designed. emission limitation (emission limits and in Table 18 of this subpart and (3) A description of the test operating limits) occurring at an affected according to the following. conditions, data, calculations, and other source where you are using a CMS to (1) The first Compliance report must information used to establish additional comply with the emission limit in this cover the period beginning on the operating limits according to subpart, you must include the compliance date that is specified for § 63.8030(h)(3). information in paragraphs (d)(5)(iii)(A) your affected source in § 63.7995 and (4) Data and rationale used to support through (N) of this section. This ending on June 30 or December 31, an engineering assessment to calculate includes periods of startup, shutdown, whichever date is the first date uncontrolled emissions from process and malfunction. following the end of the first calendar vessels as required in Table 10 of this (A) The date and time that each half after the compliance date that is subpart. malfunction started and stopped. specified for your source in § 63.7995. (d) Compliance report. The (B) The date and time that each CMS (2) The first Compliance report must Compliance report must contain the was inoperative, except for zero (low- be postmarked or delivered no later than information specified in paragraphs level) and high-level checks. July 31 or January 31, whichever date (d)(1) through (10) of this section. (C) The date, time, and duration that follows the end of the first calendar half (1) Company name and address. each CEMS was out-of-control, after the compliance date that is (2) Statement by a responsible official including the information in specified for your affected source in with that official’s name, title, and § 63.8(c)(8). § 63.7995. signature, certifying the accuracy of the (D) The date and time that each (3) Each subsequent Compliance content of the report. deviation started and stopped, and report must cover the semiannual whether each deviation occurred during reporting period from January 1 through (3) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the reporting period. a period of startup, shutdown, or June 30 or the semiannual reporting malfunction or during another period. period from July 1 through December (4) If you had a startup, shutdown, or malfunction during the reporting period (E) A summary of the total duration of 31. the deviation during the reporting (4) Each subsequent Compliance and you took actions consistent with your startup, shutdown, and period, and the total duration as a report must be postmarked or delivered percent of the total source operating no later than July 31 or January 31, malfunction plan, the Compliance report must include the information in time during that reporting period. whichever date is the first date (F) A breakdown of the total duration § 63.10(d)(5)(i). following the end of the semiannual of the deviations during the reporting (5) The Compliance report must reporting period. period into those that are due to startup, contain the information on deviations (5) For each affected source that is shutdown, control equipment problems, according to paragraphs (d)(5)(i), (ii), subject to permitting regulations process problems, other known causes, and (iii) of this section. pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR and other unknown causes. part 71, and if the permitting authority (i) If there are no deviations from any (G) A summary of the total duration has established dates for submitting emission limitations (emission limits of CMS downtime during the reporting semiannual reports pursuant to 40 CFR and operating limits) that apply to you, period, and the total duration of CMS 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR and there are no deviations from the downtime as a percent of the total 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), you may submit the requirements for work practice source operating time during that first and subsequent Compliance reports standards in Table 17 of this subpart, reporting period. according to the dates the permitting include a statement that there were no (H) An identification of each authority has established instead of deviations from the emission limitations hazardous air pollutant that was according to the dates in paragraphs or work practice standards during the monitored at the affected source. (b)(1) through (4) of this section. reporting period. (I) A brief description of the process (c) Precompliance report. You must (ii) For each deviation from an units. submit a Precompliance report to emission limitation (emission limits and (J) A brief description of the CMS. request approval of any of the operating limits) and for each deviation (K) The date of the latest CMS information in paragraphs (c)(1) through from the requirements for work practice certification or audit. (4) of this section. We will either standards in Table 17 of this subpart (L) A description of any changes in approve or disapprove the report within that occurs at an affected source where CMS, processes, or controls since the 90 days after we receive it. If we you are not using a continuous last reporting period. disapprove the report, you must still be monitoring system (CMS) to comply (M) Operating logs and operating in compliance with the emission with the emission limitations or work scenarios. limitations and work practice standards practice standards in this subpart, you (N) The operating day or operating in this subpart by the compliance date. must include the information in block average values of monitored To change any of the information paragraphs (e)(5)(ii)(A) through (C) of parameters. submitted in the report, you must notify this section. This includes periods of (6) If there were no periods during us 60 days before the planned change is startup, shutdown, and malfunction. which the CMS (including CEMS and to be implemented. (A) The total operating time of each CPMS) was out-of-control as specified (1) Requests for approval to set affected source during the reporting in § 63.8(c)(7), a statement that there operating limits for parameters other period. were no periods during which the CMS than those in Table 7 of this subpart, (B) Information on the number, was out-of-control during the reporting and for control devices and treatment duration, and cause of deviations period. units other than those in Table 7 of this (including unknown cause, if (7) If you invoke the delay of repair subpart. Alternatively, you may make applicable), as applicable, and the provisions in § 63.104(e) for heat these requests according to § 63.8(f). corrective action taken. exchange systems, you must include the
VerDate 11
information in § 63.104(f)(2)(i) through same deviations in the semiannual (3) Request for alternatives to relative (iv) in your next compliance report. If monitoring report. However, submission accuracy test for CEMS as required in the leak remains unrepaired, you must of a Compliance report shall not § 63.8(f)(6)(i). also submit the information in each otherwise affect any obligation the (4) Records of the date and time that subsequent compliance report until affected source may have to report each deviation started and stopped, and repair of the leak is reported. deviations from permit requirements to whether the deviation occurred during a (8) Include the information in the permit authority. period of startup, shutdown, or paragraphs (d)(8)(i) through (iii), as malfunction or during another period. applicable, for storage tanks subject to § 63.8080 What records must I keep? (c) You must keep the records the emission limitations and work (a) You must keep the records required in Tables 15, 16, and 17 of this practice standards in Table 3 of this specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through subpart to show continuous compliance subpart. (10) of this section. with each emission limitation and work (i) For each storage tank subject to (1) A copy of each notification and practice standard that applies to you. control requirements, include periods of report that you submitted to comply planned routine maintenance during § 63.8085 In what form and how long must with this subpart, including all I keep my records? which the control device does not documentation supporting any Initial (a) Your records must be in a form comply with the emission limitation in Notification or Notification of suitable and readily available for Table 3 of this subpart. Compliance Status that you submitted, expeditious review according to (ii) For each storage tank controlled according to the requirements in § 63.10(b)(1). with a floating roof, include a copy of § 63.10(b)(2)(xiv). the inspection record (required in (b) As specified in § 63.10(b)(1), you (2) The records in § 63.6(e)(3)(iii) must keep each record for 5 years § 63.1065) when inspection failures through (v) related to startup, shutdown, occur. following the date of each occurrence, and malfunction. measurement, maintenance, corrective (iii) If you elect to use an extension (3) Records of performance tests and for a floating roof inspection in action, report, or record. performance evaluations as required in (c) You must keep each record on site accordance with § 63.1063(c)(2)(iv)(B) or § 63.10(b)(2)(viii). (e)(2), include the documentation for at least 2 years after the date of each (4) Records specified in § 63.1038(b) required by § 63.1063 (c)(2)(iv)(B) or occurrence, measurement, maintenance, and (c) for equipment subject to the (e)(2). corrective action, report, or record (9) Include each new operating work practice standards for equipment according to § 63.10(b)(1). You can keep scenario which has been operated since leaks in Table 4 of this subpart. the records offsite for the remaining 3 the time period covered by the last (5) Daily schedule or log of each years. operating scenario. compliance report. For each new Other Requirements and Information operating scenario, you must provide (6) The information specified in verification that the operating paragraphs (a)(6)(i) and (ii) for process § 63.8090 What compliance options do I conditions for any associated control or vessels in compliance with the percent have if part of my plant is subject to both treatment device have not been reduction emission limitation in Table 1 this subpart and another subpart? exceeded and that any required of this subpart. (a) Compliance with 40 CFR parts 264 calculations and engineering analyses (i) Records of whether each batch and 265, subparts AA, BB, and/or CC. have been performed. For the initial operated was considered a standard (1) After the compliance dates specified compliance report, each operating batch. in § 63.7995, if a control device that you scenario operated since the compliance (ii) The actual uncontrolled and use to comply with this subpart is also date must be submitted. controlled emissions for each batch that subject to monitoring, recordkeeping, (10) Include the information specified is considered to be a non-standard and reporting requirements in 40 CFR in § 63.1039(b)(1) through (8) for batch. part 264, subpart AA, BB, or CC; or the equipment subject to the work practice (7) Records of planned routine monitoring and recordkeeping standards for equipment leaks in Table maintenance for control devices used to requirements in 40 CFR part 265, 4 of this subpart. comply with the percent reduction subpart AA, BB, or CC; and you comply (e) Each affected source that has emission limitations for storage tanks in with the periodic reporting obtained a title V operating permit Table 3 of this subpart. requirements under 40 CFR part 264, pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 71 must (8) The maintenance wastewater plan subpart AA, BB, or CC that would apply report all deviations as defined in this required in Table 9 of this subpart. to the device if your facility had final- subpart in the semiannual monitoring (9) A record of each time a safety permitted status, you may elect to report required by 40 CFR device is opened to avoid unsafe comply either with the monitoring, 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR conditions in accordance with recordkeeping, and reporting 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A). If an affected source § 63.8000(c). requirements of this subpart; or with the submits a Compliance report pursuant (10) Records of the results of each monitoring and recordkeeping to Table 18 of this subpart along with, CPMS calibration, validation check, and requirements in 40 CFR part 264 or 265 or as part of, the semiannual monitoring inspection required by § 63.8035(c)(6) and the reporting requirements in 40 report required by 40 CFR through (8), (d)(4) and (5), (e)(4) through CFR part 264, as described in this 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR (7), and (f)(3) and (4). paragraph, which constitute compliance 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), and the Compliance (b) For each CEMS, you must keep the with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and report includes all required information records specified in paragraphs (b)(1) reporting requirements of this subpart. If concerning deviations from any through (4) of this section. you elect to comply with the emission limitation (including any (1) Records described in monitoring, recordkeeping, and operating limit), or work practice § 63.10(b)(2)(vi)–(xi). reporting requirements in 40 CFR parts standard in this subpart, submission of (2) Previous (i.e., superseded) 264 and/or 265, you must report the the compliance report shall be deemed versions of the performance evaluation information required for the compliance to satisfy any obligation to report the plan as required in § 63.8(d)(3). report in § 63.8075, and you must
VerDate 11
identify in the Notification of constitute compliance with this subpart. Air pollution control device (or control Compliance Status required by In the Notification of Compliance Status device) (§ 63.1251) § 63.8070 the monitoring, required by § 63.8070, you must identify Annual average concentration (§ 63.111) recordkeeping, and reporting authority the more stringent provisions of 40 CFR Block (§ 63.1251) under which you will comply. parts 260 through 272 with which you Boiler (§ 63.111) (2) After the compliance dates will comply. You must also identify in Car seal (§ 63.111) specified in this section, if any the Notification of Compliance Status Cleaning operation (§ 63.1251) equipment at an affected source that is required by § 63.8070 the information Closed-vent system (§ 63.111) subject to this subpart is also subject to and procedures that you used to make Combustion device (§ 63.111) 40 CFR part 264, subpart BB or to 40 any stringency determinations. If you do Connector (§ 63.1020) CFR part 265, subpart BB, then not elect to determine the more Container (§ 63.111) compliance with the recordkeeping and stringent requirements, you must Cover (§ 63.111) reporting requirements of 40 CFR part comply with both the provisions of 40 Dense gas system (§ 63.1251) 264 and/or 265 may be used to comply CFR parts 260 through 272 and the Double block and bleed system with the recordkeeping and reporting provisions of this subpart. (§ 63.1020) requirements of § 63.1255, to the extent Duct work (§ 63.111) that the requirements of 40 CFR part 264 § 63.8095 What parts of the General Enhanced biological treatment system and/or 265 duplicate the requirements Provisions apply to me? (§ 63.111) of this subpart. You must identify in the Table 19 of this subpart shows which External floating roof (EFR) (§ 63.1601) Notification of Compliance Status parts of the General Provisions in Fixed roof (§ 63.1251) required by § 63.8070 if you will comply §§ 63.1 through 63.15 apply to you. Flexible fabric sleeve seal (§ 63.1061) with the recordkeeping and reporting § 63.8100 Who implements and enforces Floating roof (§ 63.1061) authority under 40 CFR part 264 and/or this subpart? Flow indicator (§ 63.111) 265. (a) This subpart can be implemented Halogenated vent stream (§ 63.111) (b) Compliance with 40 CFR part 60, and enforced by us, the US EPA, or a Hard-piping (§ 63.111) subpart Kb. After the compliance dates delegated authority such as your State, Hydrogen halides and halogens specified in § 63.7995, you are in local, or tribal agency. If the US EPA (§ 63.1251) compliance with this subpart HHHHH Administrator has delegated authority to In gas and vapor service (§ 63.1020) for any storage tank that is assigned to your State, local, or tribal agency, then In heavy liquid service (§ 63.1020) In light liquid service (§ 63.1020) miscellaneous coating manufacturing that agency has the authority to In liquid service (§ 63.1020) operations and that is both controlled implement and enforce this subpart. In organic hazardous air pollutant with a floating roof and in compliance You should contact your US EPA (HAP) service (§ 63.1020) with the provisions of 40 CFR part 60, Regional Office to find out if this In vacuum service (§ 63.1020) subpart Kb. You are in compliance with subpart is delegated to your State, local, this subpart HHHHH if you have a Individual drain system (§ 63.111) or tribal agency. Initial fill or initial filling (§ 63.1061) storage tank with a fixed roof, closed- (b) In delegating implementation and Instrumentation system (§ 63.1020) vent system, and control device in enforcement authority of this subpart to Internal floating roof (§ 63.1061) compliance with 40 CFR part 60, a State, local, or tribal agency under subpart Kb, you must comply with the Junction box (§ 63.111) section 40 CFR part 63, subpart E, the Liquid-mounted seal (§ 63.1061) monitoring, recordkeeping, and authorities contained in paragraph (c) of reporting requirements in this subpart Liquids dripping (§ 63.1020) this section are retained by the Mechanical shoe seal or metallic shoe HHHHH. You must also identify in your Administrator of US EPA and are not Notification of Compliance Status (§ 63.1061) delegated to the State, local, or tribal Nonrepairable (§ 63.1020) required by § 63.8070 which storage agency. tanks are in compliance with 40 CFR 60 Oil-water separator (§ 63.111) (c) The authorities that will not be Open-ended valve or line (§ 63.1020) part 60, subpart Kb. delegated to State, local, or tribal (c) Compliance with other regulations Point of determination (§ 63.111) agencies are as follows: Pressure relief device or valve for wastewater. After the compliance (1) Approval of alternatives to the dates specified in § 63.7995, if you have (§ 63.1020) non-opacity emission limitations and Primary fuel (§ 63.111) an affected wastewater stream that is work practice standards in § 63.8000(a) also subject to provisions in 40 CFR Process heater (§ 63.111) under § 63.6(g). Repaired (§ 63.1020) parts 260 through 272, you may elect to (2) Approval of major alternatives to Residual (§ 63.111) determine whether this subpart or 40 test methods under § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and Safety device (§ 63.1251) CFR parts 260 through 272 contain the (f) and as defined in § 63.90. more stringent control requirements (3) Approval of major alternatives to Screwed (threaded) connector (e.g., design, operation, and inspection monitoring under § 63.8(f) and as (§ 63.1020) Sewer line (§ 63.111) requirements for waste management defined in § 63.90. units; numerical treatment standards; (4) Approval of major alternatives to Surface impoundment (§ 63.111) etc.) and the more stringent testing, recordkeeping and reporting under System flowrate (§ 63.1251) monitoring, recordkeeping, and § 63.10(f) and as defined in § 63.90. Table 9 compound (§ 63.111) reporting requirements. Compliance Total organic compounds (TOC) with provisions of 40 CFR parts 260 § 63.8105 What definitions apply to this (§ 63.1251) through 272 that are determined to be subpart? Treatment process (§ 63.111) more stringent than the requirements of (a) The following terms used in this Uncontrolled HAP emissions (§ 63.1251) this subpart constitutes compliance subpart and referenced subparts are Vapor-mounted seal (§ 63.1061) with this subpart. For example, defined in §§ 63.101, 63.111, 63.1020, Wastewater tank (§ 63.111) provisions of 40 CFR parts 260 through 63.1601, and 63.1251 as specified after Water seal controls (§ 63.111) 272 for treatment units that meet the each term: (b) All terms used in this subpart and conditions specified in § 63.138(h) Actual HAP emissions (§ 63.1251) referenced subparts that are not listed in
VerDate 11
paragraph (a) of this section are defined during periods not associated with a Nondedicated solvent recovery in the CAA, in 40 CFR 63.2, the General shutdown. Examples of activities that operations located within a contiguous Provisions of this part, and in this can generate maintenance wastewater area within the affected source are section as follows: include descaling of heat exchanger considered single processes. Bulk loading means the loading, into tubing bundles, cleaning of distillation Process vessel vent means a vent from a tank truck or rail car, of liquid coating column traps, draining of pumps into an a mixing vessel or vents from multiple products that contain one or more of the individual drain system, and draining of mixing vessels that are manifolded organic HAP, as defined in section 112 portions of the process equipment for together into a common header, through of the CAA, from a loading rack. A repair. Wastewater from cleaning which a HAP-containing gas stream is, loading rack is the system used to fill operations is not considered or has the potential to be, released to the tank trucks and railcars at a single maintenance wastewater. atmosphere. Emission streams that are geographic site. Mixing means an operation in which undiluted and uncontrolled containing Closed biological treatment process a material is combined with one or more less than 50 ppmv HAP, as determined means a tank or surface impoundment materials at ambient temperature through process knowledge that no HAP where biological treatment occurs and without a chemical reaction. are present in the emission stream or air emissions from the treatment process Open biological treatment process using an engineering assessment as are routed to a control device by means means a biological treatment process discussed in § 63.1257(d)(2)(ii), test data of a closed-vent system or by means of that is not a closed biological treatment using Methods 18 of 40 CFR part 60, hard-piping. The tank or surface process as defined in this section. appendix A, or any other test method impoundment has a fixed roof, as Operating scenario means for the that has been validated according to the defined in § 63.1251, or a floating purposes of reporting and procedures in Method 301 of appendix flexible membrane cover that meets the recordkeeping, any specific operation of A of this part, are not considered requirements specified in § 63.134. process vessels and associated process vessel vents. Process vessel Construction means the onsite equipment used to produce a specific vents do not include vents on storage fabrication, erection, or installation of family of coatings and includes for the tanks, wastewater emission sources, or an affected source. Addition of new production of each family of coatings: pieces of equipment subject to the equipment to an affected source does (1) A description of the process and emission limitations and work practice not constitute construction, but it may the type of process equipment used; standards in entry 1. of Table 4 of this constitute reconstruction of the affected (2) An identification of related subpart. source if it satisfies the definition of process vessel vents and their associated Recovery device means an individual reconstruction in § 63.2. emissions episodes and durations, unit of equipment used for the purpose Deviation means any instance in wastewater point of determination of recovering chemicals for fuel value which an affected source subject to this (POD), and storage tanks; (i.e., net positive heating value), use, (3) The applicable control subpart, or an owner or operator of such reuse, or for sale for fuel value, use or requirements of this subpart, including a source: reuse. Examples of equipment that may (1) fails to meet any requirement or the level of required control, and for be recovery devices include absorbers, obligation established by this subpart, vents, the level of control for each vent; carbon adsorbers, condensers, oil-water including but not limited to any (4) The control or treatment devices separators or organic-water separators, emission limitation (including any used, as applicable, including a or organic removal devices such as operating limit) or work practice description of operating and/or testing decanters, strippers, or thin-film standard; conditions for any associated control evaporation units. To be a recovery (2) fails to meet any term or condition device; that is adopted to implement an (5) The vents from process vessels, device for a wastewater stream, a applicable requirement in this subpart wastewater POD, and storage tanks decanter and any other equipment based and that is included in the operating (including those from other processes) on the operating principle of gravity permit for any affected source required that are simultaneously routed to the separation must receive only two-phase to obtain such a permit; or control or treatment device(s); liquid streams. (3) fails to meet any emission (6) The applicable monitoring Responsible official means limitation (including any operating requirements of this subpart and any responsible official as defined in 40 CFR limit) or work practice standard in this parametric level that assures 70.2. subpart during startup, shutdown, or compliance for all emissions routed to Shutdown means the cessation of malfunction, regardless or whether or the control or treatment device; operation of an affected source, any not such failure is permitted by this (7) Calculations and engineering process vessels within an affected subpart. analyses required to demonstrate source, or equipment required or used Emission limitation means any compliance; and to comply with this subpart as a result emission limit or operating limit. (8) For reporting purposes, a change of a malfunction or for replacement of Large control device means a control to any of these elements not previously equipment, repair, or any other purpose device that controls total HAP emissions reported, except for paragraph (5) of this not excluded from this definition. of greater than or equal to 10 tons/yr, definition, constitutes a new operating Shutdown also applies to the emptying before control. scenario. and degassing of storage tanks. Maintenance wastewater means Predominant HAP means, as used in Shutdown does not apply to the wastewater generated by the draining of calibrating an analyzer, the single cessation of production of a particular process fluid from components in the organic HAP that constitutes the largest coating at the end of a campaign, for miscellaneous coating manufacturing percentage of the total HAP in the routine maintenance, for rinsing or operations into an individual drain analyzed gas stream, by volume. washing of equipment between batches, system in preparation for or during Process means all of the equipment or other routine operations. maintenance activities. Maintenance which collectively function to produce Small control device means a control wastewater can be generated during a family of coatings. A process may device that controls total HAP emissions planned and unplanned shutdowns and consist of one or more mixing vessels. of less than 10 tons/yr, before control.
VerDate 11
Standard batch means a batch process solvent recovery. The following are not dispose of wastewater streams or operated within a range of operating considered storage tanks for the residuals. Examples of waste conditions that are documented in an purposes of this subpart: management units include wastewater operating scenario. Emissions from a (1) Vessels permanently attached to tanks, air flotation units, surface standard batch are based on the motor vehicles such as trucks, railcars, impoundments, containers, oil-water or operating conditions that result in barges, or ships; organic-water separators, individual highest emissions. The standard batch (2) Pressure vessels designed to drain systems, biological wastewater defines the uncontrolled and controlled operate in excess of 204.9 kilopascals treatment units, waste incinerators, and emissions for each emission episode and without emissions to the organic removal devices such as steam defined under the operating scenario. atmosphere; and air stripper units, and thin film Startup means the setting in operation (3) Vessels storing organic liquids that evaporation units. If such equipment is of a new or reconstructed affected contain HAP only as impurities; used for recovery then it is part of the source. For new equipment added to an (4) Wastewater storage tanks; and miscellaneous coating manufacturing affected source, including equipment (5) Process vessels. operations and is not a waste used to comply with this subpart, Supplemental gases are any gaseous management unit. startup means the first time the streams that are not defined as process Wastewater stream means organic equipment is put into operation. Startup vents, or closed-vent systems from HAP-containing water, raw material, also means the first time a new family wastewater management and treatment intermediate, product, by-product, or of coatings is produced in existing units, storage tanks, or equipment waste material that is discarded from equipment. Startup does not apply to components and that contain less than miscellaneous coating manufacturing the first time equipment is put into 50 ppmv TOC, as determined through operations through a single POD, and operation at the start of a campaign to process knowledge, that are introduced that contains an annual average produce a family of coatings that has into vent streams or manifolds. Air concentration of Table 9 compounds (as been produced in the past, after a required to operate combustion device defined in § 63.111) of at least 2,000 shutdown for maintenance, or at the burner(s) is not considered ppmw at any flow rate. For the purposes beginning of each batch within a supplemental gas. of this subpart, noncontact cooling campaign. Total organic compounds or (TOC) water is not considered a wastewater Storage tank means a tank or other means the total gaseous organic stream. vessel that is used to store organic compounds (minus methane and Work practice standard means any liquids that contain one or more HAP as ethane) in a vent stream, with the design, equipment, work practice, or raw material feedstocks. Storage tank concentrations expressed on a carbon operational standard, or combination also means a tank or other vessel in a basis. thereof, that is promulgated pursuant to tank farm that receives and accumulates Waste management unit means the section 112(h) of the Clean Air Act. used solvent from multiple batches of a equipment, structure(s), and/or process or processes for purposes of device(s) used to convey, store, treat, or Tables to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63
As required in § 63.8000(a)(1) and (e), you must meet each emission limitation and work practice standard in the following table that applies to your process vessels:
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR PROCESS VESSELS
For each * * * At * * * You must * * * Or you must * * *
1. Portable process vessel >250 An existing source ...... Equip the vessel with a cover or Non applicable. gal. lid that must be in place at all times when the vessel contains a HAP.
VerDate 11
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR PROCESS VESSELS— Continued
For each * * * At * * * You must * * * Or you must * * *
2. Stationary process vessel >250 An existing source ...... Equip the vessel with a tightly fit- Equip the vessel with a tightly-fit- gal. ting vented cover or lid that ting vented cover or lid that must be closed at all times must be closed at all times when the vessel contains a when the vessel contains a HAP; and route emissions from HAP; and route emissions from the vented cover or lid through the vented cover or lid through a closed-vent system to any of a closed-vent system to a con- the following: a control device denser that reduces the outlet that reduces HAP emissions by gas temperature to: <10°C if ≥75 percent by weight; or a the process vessels contains control device that reduces HAP with a partial pressure emissions to an outlet total or- <0.7 kPa; or <2°C if the proc- ganic HAP or TOC concentra- ess vessel contains HAP with a tion ≤20 ppmv and an outlet hy- partial pressure ≥0.7 kPa and drogen halide and halogen con- <17.2 kpa; or <¥5°C if the centration ≤20 ppmv, both cor- process vessel contains HAP rected for supplemental gases with a partial pressure ≥17.2 as specified in § 63.8030(g), or kpa; and determine partial pres- a flare that meets the perform- sures at 25°C; and comply with ance requirements in the work practice standards for § 63.11(b), but you may not use closed-vent systems specified a flare to control halogenated in Table 4 of this subpart. vent streams; or a control de- vice specified in § 63.8010(f); and Comply with the work prac- tice standards for closed-vent systems specified in Table 4 of this subpart; and comply with the emission limitations in Table 8 of this subpart if you use a combustion device to control halogenated vent streams. De- termine whether a vent stream is halogenated according to § 63.8015.
VerDate 11
TABLE 1 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR PROCESS VESSELS— Continued
For each * * * At * * * You must * * * Or you must * * *
3. Portable and stationary process A new or reconstructed source .... Equip the vessel with a tightly fit- Equip the vessel with a tightly-fit- vessel >250 gal. ting vented cover or lid that ting vented cover or lid that must be closed at all times must be closed at all times when the vessel contains a when the vessel contains a HAP; and route emissions from HAP; and route emissions from the vented cover or lid through the vented cover or lid through a closed-vent system to any of a closed-vent system to a con- the following: a control device denser that reduces the outlet that reduces HAP emissions by gas temperature to: <¥4°C if ≥95 percent by weight; or a the process vessels contains control device that reduces HAP with a partial pressure emissions to an outlet total or- <0.7 kPa; or <¥20°C if the ganic HAP or TOC concentra- process vessel contains HAP tion ≤20 ppmv and an outlet hy- with a partial pressure ≥0.7 kpa drogen halide and halogen con- and <17.2 kpa; or <¥30°C if centration ≤20 ppmv, both cor- the process vessel contains rected for supplemental gases HAP with a partial pressure as specified in § 63.8030(j); or a ≥17.2 kpa; and determine par- flare that meets the perform- tial pressures at 25°C; and ance requirements in comply with the work practice § 63.11(b), but you may not use standards for closed-vent sys- a flare to control halogenated tems specified in Table 4 of this vent streams; or a control de- subpart. vice specified in § 63.8010(f); and Comply with the work prac- tice standards for closed-vent systems specified in Table 4 of this subpart; and comply with the emission limitations in Table 6 of this subpart, if you use a combustion device to control halogenated vent streams. De- termine whether a vent stream is halogenated according to § 63.8015.
As required in § 63.8000(a)(2) and (e) and 63.8020, you must meet each emission limitation and work practice standard in the following table that applies to your wastewater streams, waste management units, and liquid streams in open systems within miscellaneous coating manufacturing operations:
TABLE 2 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER STREAMS, WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS, AND LIQUID STREAMS IN OPEN SYSTEMS WITHIN THE MISCELLANEOUS COATING MANU- FACTURING OPERATIONS
For each * * * You must * * * According to the following * * *
1. Waste management unit (i.e., wastewater a. Suppress emissions of HAP listed on Table tank, surface impoundment, container, indi- 9 of subpart G by complying with the re- vidual drain system, and oil-water separator) quirements specified in § 63.132(a)(2)(i) and used to convey, store, treat, or dispose of an 63.133 through 63.137, and affected wastewater stream. b. Route vent streams from the waste man- For any halogenated vent streams that are agement units through a closed-vent sys- controlled with a combustion device, also tem to any of the following: a flare that comply with the emissions limitations in meets the performance requirements of Table 6 of this subpart. Determine whether § 63.11(b), except that you may not qent a a vent stream is halogenated according to halogenated vent stream to a flare; or a § 63.8015; and you must correct outlet con- control device that reduces HAP emission centrations to account for supplemental by ≥95 percent by weight; or a control de- gases using the procedures specified in vice that reduces emissions to an outlet § 63.8030(g); and you may not comply with total organic HAP or TOC concentration the outlet concentration standard for sur- ≤20 ppmv; or a combustion device with a face impoundments and containers. minimum residence time of 0.5 seconds at a minimum temperature of 760° C; or a control device specified in § 63.8010(f); and comply with the work practice standards for closed-vent systems specified in Table 4 of this subpart.
VerDate 11
TABLE 2 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER STREAMS, WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS, AND LIQUID STREAMS IN OPEN SYSTEMS WITHIN THE MISCELLANEOUS COATING MANU- FACTURING OPERATIONS—Continued
For each * * * You must * * * According to the following * * *
2. Affected wastewater stream ...... a. Treat the wastewater to remove or destroy i. The treatment options may be used in com- organic HAP compounds using one of the bination for different wastewater streams treatment options specified in and/or for different compounds in the same § 63.138(b)(1), (d), (e), (f), (g), or (h) of sub- wastewater streams, except where other- part Ga. wise provided in § 63.138. ii. You may use a series of treatment proc- esses in accordance with the provisions in § 63.138(a)(7). iii. You need not cover and vent an open bio- logical treatment process to a control de- vice. 3. Residual removed from an affected waste- Control HAP emissions by complying with the Non applicable. water stream. provisions in entry 1. in this table and in § 63.138(k). 4. Maintenance wastewater stream containing Develop and implement a maintenance Non applicable. HAP listed on Table 9 of subpart G of this wastewater plan according to § 63.105. part. 5. Liquid stream in an open system within the Comply with the requirements in Table 35 of You must determine the concentration of the miscellaneous coating manufacturing oper- subpart G for each item of equipment that stream being received by a tank at the inlet ations. is: b a drain, drain hub, manhole, lift station, to the tank, and you must use the proce- trench, pipe, or oil-water separator that con- dures in § 63.144(b). veys water with a total annual average con- centration of compounds listed on Table 9 of subpart G ≥4,000 ppmw at any flow rate at an existing source, or ≥2,000 ppmw at any flow rate at a new or reconstructed source; or a tank that receives one or more streams that contain water with a total an- nual average concentration of compounds listed on Table 9 of subpart G of this part ≥4,000 ppmw at any flow rate at an existing source or ≥2,000 ppmw at any flow rate at a new source.
a The references to ‘‘Group 1’’ streams in § 63.138 mean wastewater streams with a ‘‘Table 9’’ HAP concentration ≥4,000 ppmw at existing sources and ≥2,000 ppmw at new sources for the purposes of this subpart. References to ‘‘Table 8’’ compounds do not apply for the purposes of this rule. b References in § 63.149 to fuel gas systems do not apply for the purposes of this subpart. When § 63.149 refers to § 63.139(c), references to entry 1.b. in this table apply for the purposes of this subpart. As required in § 63.8000(a)(3), (e), and (h), you must meet each emission limitation and work practice standard in the following table that applies to your storage tanks:
TABLE 3 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR STORAGE TANKS
For each * * * At * * * You must * * * Or you must * * *
1. Storage tank ≥20,000 gal stor- An existing source...... Route emissions through a Operate and maintain either an ing material that has a maximum closed-vent system to either: a internal floating roof or an exter- true vapor pressure of total HAP control device that reduces or- nal floating roof designed, oper- ≥1.9 psia. ganic HAP emissions by ≥90 ated, inspected, and repaired percent by weight; or a control as specified in § 63.1063(a) device that reduces emisisons through (e); or vapor balance to an outlet total organic HAP according to § 63.1253(f), ex- or TOC concentration less than cept that: the references to or equal to 20 ppmv and an §§ 63.1255(g)(4)(i) through (iv), outlet hydrogen halide and 63.1257(c), 63.1258, 63.1259, halogen concentraction less and 63.1260 refer to than or equal to 20 ppmv; or a § 63.1024(f)(1) through (3), flare that meets the perform- Table 12 of this subpart, Table ance requirements specified in 17 of this subpart, § 63.8080, § 63.11(b); or a control device and § 63.8075, respectively; specified in § 63.8010(f); and and the 90 percent control re- Comply with the work practice quirement in § 63.1253(f)(6)(i) standards for closed-vent sys- means 95 percent for the pur- tems specified in Table 4 of this poses of this subpart. subpart.
VerDate 11
TABLE 3 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR STORAGE TANKS— Continued
For each * * * At * * * You must * * * Or you must * * *
2. Storage tank tank that meets ei- A new or reconstructed source .... Route emissions through a Operate and maintain either an ther of the following criteria: closed-vent system to either: a internal floating roof or an exter- ≥25,000 gal storing material that control device that reduces or- nal floating roof designed, oper- has a maximum true vapor pres- ganic HAP emissions by ≥90 ated, inspected, and repaired sure of total HAP ≥01.1 psia; or percent by weight; or a flare as specified in § 63.1063(a) ≥20,000 gal to <25,000 gal stor- that meets the performance re- through (e); or vapor balance ing material that has a maximum quirements specified in according to § 63.1253(f). true vapor pressoure of total § 63.11(b); or a control device HAP total HAP ≥1.5 psia. specified in § 63.8010(f); and comply with the work practice standards for closed-vent sys- tems specified in Table 4 of this subpart.
As required in §§ 63.8000(a)(4) and (e) and 63.8055(a)(3), you must meet each work practice standard in the following table that applies to your equipment leaks, closed-vent systems, and heat exchange systems:
TABLE 4 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR EQUIPMENT LEAKS, CLOSED-VENT SYSTEMS, AND HEAT EXCHANGE SYSTEMS
For each * * * You must * * *
1. Piece of equipment that is in organic HAP service and is not de- Comply with the provisions in §§ 63.1022 and 63.1024 through 63.1037 scribed in § 63.1019(c) through (e). (except § 63.1022(b)(5)). 2. Piece of equipment that is in organic HAP service 300 hr/yr ...... Identify the equipment as specified in § 63.1022(b)(5). 3. Closed-vent system that is used to route emission to a control de- Conduct annual inspections, repair leaks, and maintain records as vice that is used to comply with an emission limitation or work prac- specified in § 63.983(b), (c), and (d). tice standard in Tables 1 through 3 or 5 of this subpart. 4. Closed-vent system that contains a bypass line that could divert a Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a flow indicator that determines vent stream away from a control device used to comply with an whether vent stream flow is present. The flow indicator must be in- emission limitation or work practice standard in Tables 1 through 3 stalled at the entrance to any bypass line that could divert the vent and 5 of this subpart, except equipment such as low-leg drains, high stream away from the control device to the atmosphere, and it must bleed points, analyzer vents, open-ended valves or lines, rupture indicate either the presence of flow or the lack of flow at least once disks, and pressure relief valves needed for safety purposes. very 15 minutes; or secure the bypass line valve in the closed posi- tion with a car seal or lock and key configruation. You must visually inspect the seal or closure mechanism at least once every month to ensure that the valve is maintained in the closed position and the vent stream is not diverted through the bypass line. 5. Heat exchange system that cools process equipment or materials in Monitor and repair the heat exchange system according to § 63.104(a) miscellaneous coating manufacturing operations. through (e), except that references in § 63.104 to ‘‘chemical manu- facturing process units’’ means the ‘‘miscellaneous coating manufac- turing operations for the purposes of this subpart, and references to § 63.100 do not apply for the purposes of this subpart.
As required in § 63.8000(a)(5) and (e), you must meet each emission limitation and work practice standard in the following table that applies to your transfer operations:
VerDate 11
TABLE 5 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR TRANSFER OPERATIONS
For*** You must*** And you must***
Transfer operations for bulk loading of material Use a vapor balancing system designed and Design and operate each vapor collection containing ≥3.0 million gal/yr of HAP with a operated to collect displaced emissions and system such that HAP collected at one HAP partial pressure ≥1.5 psia. route them to: the storage tank from which loading arm will not pass through another the liquid being loaded originated; or an- loading arm to the atmosphere; and prevent other storage tank connected to a common pressure relief devices from opening during header; or compress and route to a process loading; and comply with the work practice where the HAP in the emissions predomi- standards for closed-vent systems specified nantly meet one of, or a combination of, the in Table 4 of this subpart; and for any halo- following ends: recyled and or consumed in genated streams that are controlled with a the same manner as a material that fulfills combustion device, you must also comply the same function in that process; trans- with the emission limitations in Table 6 of formed by chemical reaction into materials this subpart; and vapor collection equip- that are not organic HAP; incorporated into ment for tank trucks and railcars must be a product, and/or recovered; or Route emis- compatible with the transfer operation’s sion streams through a closed-vent system vapor collection system, and the systems to a control device that reduces HAP sys- must be connected when material is trans- tems emissions by ≥75 percent by weight; ferred. or a control device that reduces emissions to an outlet total organic HAP or TOC con- centration ≤20 ppmv and an outlet hydro- gen halide and halogen concentration ≤20 ppmv, both corrected for supplemental gases as specified in § 63.8030(j); or a flare that meets the performance requirements of § 63.11(b), except that you may not vent halogenated vent streams to a flare; or a control device specified in § 63.8010(f); or a condenser that reduces the outlet gas tem- perature to: <2°C if the HAP partial pres- sure is ≥1.5 psia and <2.5 psia, or <-5°C if the HAP partial pressure is ≥2.5 psia.
As required in § 63.8000(a)(6) and (e), you must meet each emission limitation in the following table that applies to your halogenated vent streams that are controlled with a combustion device:
TABLE 6 TO SUBPART HHHHH—EMISSION LIMITATIONS FOR HALOGENATED VENT STREAMS THAT ARE CONTROLLED WITH A COMBUSTION DEVICE
For each*** You must***
Halogenated vent stream from a process vessel, wastewater, or trans- Use a halogen reduction device after the combustion device to reduce fer operation controlled with a combustion device. emissions of hydrogen halides and halogens by ≥95 percent by weight or to a concentration ≤20 ppmv.
As required in §§ 63.8000(d) and (e), 63.8040(b), and 63.8055(a)(1)(i)(C), you must meet each operating limit in the following table that applies to your control devices, recovery devices, and wastewater treatment units:
TABLE 7 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—OPERATING LIMITS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR CONTROL DEVICES, RECOVERY DEVICES, AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT UNITS
For each * * * With inlet HAP levels * * * You must * * *
1. Water scrubber ...... ≥1 ton/yr ...... Maintain the daily or block average scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure drop at or above the value established during the initial com- pliance determination. 2. Caustic scrubber ...... ≥1 ton/yr ...... Maintain the daily or block average scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure drop at or above the value established during the initial com- pliance determination; and maintain the daily average pH of the scrubber effluent at or above the value established during the initial compliance determination. 3. Condenser ...... ≥1 ton/yr ...... Maintain the daily or block average condenser outlet gas temperature at or below the value established during the initial compli- ance determination.
VerDate 11
TABLE 7 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—OPERATING LIMITS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR CONTROL DEVICES, RECOVERY DEVICES, AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT UNITS—Continued
For each * * * With inlet HAP levels * * * You must * * *
4. Regenerative carbon adsorber ...... ≥1 ton/yr ...... For each regeneration cycle, maintain the re- generation frequency, temperature to which the bed is heated during regeneration, tem- perature to which the bed is cooled within 15 minutes of the completion of the cooling phase, and regeneration stream flow rate within the operating levels established dur- ing the initial compliance determination; and you conduct a check for bed poisoning in accordance with manufacturer’s specifica- tions at least once per year. 5. Thermal incinerator ...... ≥1 ton/yr ...... Maintain the daily or block average tempera- ture of gases exiting the combustion cham- ber at or above the value established dur- ing the initial compliance determination. 6. Catalytic incinerator ...... ≥1 ton/yr ...... Maintain the daily or block average tempera- ture of the gas stream immediately before the catalyst bed at or above the value es- tablished during the initial compliance deter- mination; conduct an annual catalyst test, or, once per quarter, verify that the tem- perature difference across the catalyst bed under the same conditions as in the initial compliance determination is no lower than 90 percent of the value established during the initial compliance determination. 7. Process heaters and boilers for which the ≥1 ton/yr ...... Maintain the daily or block average tempera- vent streams are not introduced with the pri- ture of the gases exiting the combustion mary fuel or the design heat input capacity is chamber at or above the value established <44 MW. during the initial compliance determination. 8. Any control or recovery device ...... <1 ton/yr ...... Follow the applicable procedures described in your Precompliance report, according to § 63.8030(i), for demonstrating that the con- trol device is operating properly. 9. Design steam stripper ...... At any level ...... Maintain the daily or block average steam-to- wastewater ratio ≥0.04 kg/liter, wastewater feed temperature or column temperature ≥95°C, and wastewater loading ≤67,100 li- ters per hour per square meter. 10. Biological treatment unit ...... At any level ...... Maintain the TSS, BOD, and biomass con- centration established in your discharge permit. unit, except for a design steam stripper 11. Nonbiological wastewater treatment unit, At any level ...... Maintain the appropriate parameters within except for a design steam stripper. levels specified in your Precompliance re- port and approved by the permitting author- ity.
As required in § 63.8030(c), you must conduct performance tests in accordance with the requirements in the following table:
TABLE 8 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS
According to the following require- For each * * * You must * * * Using * * * ments * * *
1. Vent stream...... Select sampling port’s location Method 1 or 1A of 40 CFR part Sampling sites must be located at and the number of traverse 60, appendix A § 63.7(d)(1)(i). the inlet (if emission reduction ports. or destruction efficiency testing is required) and outlet of the control device and prior to any releases to the atmosphere. 2. Vent stream ...... Determine velocity and volumetric Method 2, 2A, 2C, or 2D of ap- Non applicable. flow rate;. pendix A to part 60 of this chapter. 3. Vent stream...... Conduct gas molecular weight Method 3 in appendix A to part 60 Non applicable. analysis. of this chapter. 4. Vent stream ...... Measure moisture content of the Method 4 in appendix A to part 60 Non applicable. stack gas. of this chapter.
VerDate 11
TABLE 8 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS—Continued
According to the following require- For each * * * You must * * * Using * * * ments * * *
5. Vent stream controlled in a non- a. Measure percent reduction of i. Method 18 in appendix A to part Measure inlet and outlet mass combustion device. organic HAP or TOC, or. 60 of chapter or ASTM D6420– emissions and calculate the 99 (incorporated by reference overall percent reduction of or- as specified in § 63.14), or. ganic HAP according to the procedures in § 63.8030(c)(5); and if you use ASTM D6420– 99, comply with the require- ments specified in § 63.2470(c)(11). ii. Method 25A in appendix A to Measure inlet and outlet mass part 60 of this chapter. emissions and calculate the overall percent reduction of TOC according to the proce- dures in § 63.8030(c)(6). b. Measure total organic HAP or i. Method 18 in appendix A to part Measure the outlet concentration TOC outlet concentration. 60 of this chapter or ASTM of each organic HAP present in D6420–99 (incorporated by ref- the inlet stream and calculate erence as specified in § 63.14), the total organic HAP emission or. concentration according to the procedures in § 63 8030(c)(7); and if you use ASTM D6420– 99, comply with the require- ments specified in § 63.2470(c)(11). ii. Method 25A in appendix A to Measure the outlet concentration part 60 of this chapter. of TOC and report the results as ppmv carbon according to the procedures in § 63.803(c)(8). 6. Vent stream controlled in a a. Measure percent reduction of i. Method 25/Method 25A in ap- Measure inlet and outlet mass combustion device. organic HAP or TOC, or. pendix A to part 60 of this emissions, as carbon, and cal- chapter, or. culate the overall percent re- duction of TOC according to the procedures in § 63.8030(c)(9). ii. Method 18 in appendix A to Measure the inlet and outlet mass part 60 of this chapter or ASTM emissions for each organic D6420–99 (incorporated by ref- HAP and calculate the overall erence as specified in § 63.14). percent reduction according to the procedures in § 63.8030(c)(5). Note: The total outlet mass emissions is deter- mined for the each organic HAP identified and quantified in the inlet gas stream; and if you use ASTM D6420–99, comply with the requirements specified in § 63.2470(c)(11). b. Measure total organic HAP or i. Method 25A in appendix A to Measure the outlet concentration TOC outlet concentration. part 60 of this chapter, or on an as carbon basis accord- ing to the procedures in § 63.8030(c)(8) ii. Method 18 in appendix A to Measure the outlet concentration part 60 of this chapter. of each organic HAP contained in the inlet stream to the com- bustion device and calculate the total organic HAP con- centration of the outlet emis- sions according to the proce- dures in § 63.8030(c)(7); and if you use ASTM D6420–99, com- ply with the requirements in § 63.2470(c)(11). 7. Vent stream...... Measure hydrogen halide and Method 26 or 26A in appendix A According to the procedures in halogen concentrations. to part 60 of this chapter. § 63.8030(c)(10) 8. Wastewater samples ...... a. Measure HAP concentration .... i. Method 305 in appendix A of Comply with the procedures in this part. § 63.1257(b)(9)(vi). ii. Method 624, 625, 1624, 1625 Comply with the procedures in in appendix A to part 136 of this § 63.1257(b)(10)(vi). chapter.
VerDate 11
TABLE 8 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS—Continued
According to the following require- For each * * * You must * * * Using * * * ments * * *
iii. Method 8260 or 8270 in ‘‘Test As an alternative you may use Methods for Evaluating Solid any more recent updated Waste, Physical/Chemical version of Method 8260 or 8270 Methods,’’ EPA Publication No. that we publish. To use these SW–846, Third Edition, Sep- methods, you must maintain a tember 1986, as amended by formal quality assurance pro- Update I, November 15, 1992. gram consistent with either sec- tion 8 of Method 8260 or Meth- od 8270, and this program must include the following elements related to measuring concentra- tions of volatile compounds: documentation of site-specific procedures to minimize the loss of compounds due to volatiliza- tion, biodegradation, reaction, or sorption during the sample collection, storage, and prepa- ration steps; documentation of specific quality assurance pro- cedures followed during sam- pling, sample preparation, sam- ple introduction, and analysis; measurement of the average accuracy and precision of the specific procedures, including field duplicates field spiking of the material source before or during sampling with com- pounds having similar charac- teristics to the target analyte. iv. Other EPA Methods ...... Use procedures specified in the method, validate the method using the procedures in § 63.1257(b)(10)(iv)(A) or (B), and comply with the procedures in § 63.1257(b)(1)(vi). v. Methods other than an EPA Use procedures specified in the Method. method, validate the method using the procedures in § 63.1257(b)(10)(iv)(A) and comply with the procedures in § 63.1257(b)(10)(vi). 9. Vent stream controlled using a a. Determine compliance with visi- Method 22 in appendix A to part Non applicable. flare. ble emissions provisions. 60 of this chapter. b. Determine heating value of gas i. Method 18 in appendix A to part Use the equations in § 63.11(b)(6) being combusted. 60 of this chapter or ASTM to calculate the heating value. D6420–99 (incorporated by ref- erence as specified in § 63.14) to determine the organics con- centration, and ii. ASTM D1946–77 (incorporated by reference as specified in § 63.14) to determine the hydro- gen and carbon monoxide con- centrations, and iii. ASTM D2382–76 (incorporated by reference as specified in § 63.14) to determine heats of combustion if published values are not available or cannot be calculated.
VerDate 11
TABLE 8 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS—Continued
According to the following require- For each * * * You must * * * Using * * * ments * * *
c. Determine the actual exit veloc- i. Method 2, 2A, 2C, or 2D in ap- A. Divide the volumetric flow rate ity for steam-assisted and non- pendix A to 40 CFR part 60 to by the unobstructed (free) assisted flares. determine the volumetric flow cross-sectional area of the flare rate. tip to calculate the actual exit velocity, or B. If the actual exit velocity is ≥60 feet per second, use the heat- ing value calculated according to the procedures in entry 9.b. of this table in the appropriate equation in § 63.11(b)(7)(ii) or (iii) to calculate the maximum permitted velocity.
As required in §§ 63.8025(a), (b), and (c), 63.8030(a), and 63.8040(a), you must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission limitation and work practice standard that applies to your process vessels as specified in the following table:
TABLE 9 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR PROCESS VESSELS
You have demonstrated initial compliance For each*** For the following standard*** if***
1. Portable process vessel >250 gal at an exist- Equip with a cover ...... You have installed a cover and document this ing source. fact in the notification of compliance status. 2. Stationary process vessel >250 gal at an ex- Equip with a tightly-fitting vented cover or lid You determine total uncontrolled emissions to isting source. and route emissions through a closed-vent the control device in accordance with system to a control device that reduces § 63.1257(d)(2)(i) and (ii), and you deter- HAP emissions by ≥75 percent. mine controlled emissions for the process vessel based on the results of a perform- ance test or design evaluation conducted according to § 63.1257(d)(3); and based on the performance test or design evaluation, you determine the control device reduces HAP emissions by ≥75 percent by weight; and during the performance test or design evaluation, you establish operating limits for the control devices in Table 7 of this sub- part, as applicable, in accordance with the requirements specified in § 63.8030(d), (e), or (f); and you have a record of how you established the operating limits. 3. Portable and stationary vessels >250 gal at Equip with a tightly fitting vented cover or lid You determine total uncontrolled emissions to a new source. and route emissions through a closed-vent the control device using the procedures in system to a control device that reduces or- § 63.1257(d)(2)(i) and (ii); and you deter- ganic HAP emissions by ≥95 percent. mine controlled emissions for the process vessel based on the results of a perform- ance test or design evaluation conducted according to with § 63.1257(d)(3); and based on the performance test or organic HAP emissions by ≥95 percent by weight; and during the performance test or design evaluation, you establish operating limits for the control devices in Table 7 of this sub- part, as applicable, in accordance § 63.8030(d), (e), or (f); and you have a record of how you established the operating limits. 4. Stationary process vessel >250 gal at an ex- Equip with a tightly fitting vented cover or lid You conduct a performance test using the test isting source or a new source; portable proc- and route emissions through a closed-vent methods specified in § 63.1257(b)(1) ess vessel >250 gal at a new source. system to a control device that reduces through (6), as applicable, to show the out- emissions to an outlet total organic HAP or let total organic HAP or TOC concentration TOC concentration ≤20 ppmv. is ≤20 ppmv; and during the performance test, you establish operating limits for the control devices in Table 7 of this subpart, as applicable, in accordance with § 63.8030(e) or (f); and you have a record of how you established the operating limits.
VerDate 11
TABLE 9 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR PROCESS VESSELS—Continued
You have demonstrated initial compliance For each*** For the following standard*** if***
Equip with a tightly fitting vented cover or lid You conduct an initial flare compliance as- and vent emissions through a closed-vent sessment as specified in §§ 63.987(b)(3) system to a flare that meets the perform- and 63.997; and the visible emissions, net ance requirements specified in § 63.11(b). heating value, and exit velocity meet the re- quirements specified in § 63.11(b)(4), (6), and (7). 5. Stationary or portable process vessel >250 Control emissions with a condenser that re- You calculate and record the HAP partial gal at an existing or new source. duces outlet gas temperatures to a specific pressure for the material in the process value. vessel; and you have results of continuous direct measurement of the condenser outlet gas temperature showing the temperature is <10°C if the HAP partial pressure is <0.7 kPa, or <2°C if the HAP partial pressure is ≥0.7 kPa and <17.2 kPa, or <¥5°C if the HAP partial pressure is ≥17.2 kPa; and you include the results of the HAP partial pres- sure calculations and outlet gas tempera- ture measurements in the notification of compliance status.
As required in §§ 63.8025(a), (b), and (c), 63.8030(a), and 63.8040(a), you must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission limitation and work practice standard that applies to your wastewater streams, waste management units, and liquid streams in open systems within miscellaneous coating manufacturing operations as specified in the following table:
TABLE 10 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER STREAMS, WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS, AND LIQUID STREAMS IN OPEN SYSTEMS WITHIN MIS- CELLANEOUS COATING MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For each * * * For the following standard * * * ***
1. Waste management unit ...... Install a fixed roof, floating roof, cover, or en- You design and install the fixed roofs, floating closure to suppress emissions. roofs, covers, and enclosures to meet the requirements enclosure to specified in §§ 63.133 through 63.137; and you conduct an initial inspection of the waste manage- ment unit for improper work practices and control equipment failures in accordance with the requirements specified in §§ 63.133 through 63.137 and 63.143(a).
VerDate 11
TABLE 10 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER STREAMS, WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS, AND LIQUID STREAMS IN OPEN SYSTEMS WITHIN MIS- CELLANEOUS COATING MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS—Continued
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For each * * * For the following standard * * * ***
2. Vent stream from a waste management unit a. Vent emissions through a closed-vent sys- You conduct either a performance test in ac- tem to: a control device that reduces or- cordance with the requirements specified in ganic HAP emissions by ≥95 percent by § 63.145(i) (except when § 63.145(i)(6) and weight or to an outlet total oganic HAP or (9) require concentration corrections to 3 TOC concentration ≤20 ppmv; or a combus- percent O2, the correction for supplemental tion device with a minimum temperature of gases in § 63.8030(g) applies for the pur- 760° C. poses of this subpart) or a design evalua- tion in accordance with the requirements specified in § 63.139(d)(2). If the control de- vice will be operated over a range of condi- tions, you are not required to test over the entire range. In such cases, you may sup- plement the performance test results with modeling and/or engineering assessments; and the performance test or design evalua- tion shows the organic HAP emissions are reduced by ≥95 percent by weight, or the total organic HAP or TOC emissions are re- duced to an outlet concentration, corrected to account for supplemental gases, of ≤20 ppmv; and during the design evaluation or performance test, you establish operating limits for the control devices in Table 7 of this subpart, as applicable, according to § 63.8030(d), (e), or (f); and you have a record of how you established the operating limits during the design evaluation or per- formance test. b. Vent emission through a closed-vent sys- You conduct an initial flare compliance as- tem to a flare that meets the performance sessment as specified in §§ 63.987(b)(3) requirements of § 63.11(b). and 63.997; and the visible emissions, net heating value, and exit velocity meet the re- quirements specified in § 63.11(b)(4), (6), and (7). c. Route emissions through a closed-vent sys- You document in your notification of compli- tem to a control device specified in ance status that you route emissions to a § 63.8010(f). device specified in § 63.8010(f). 3. Affected wastewater stream...... a. Treatment options in § 63.138(b), (c), (e), You conduct either a performance test or a (f), or (g). design evaluation in accordance with § 63.138(j); and the performance test or de- sign evaluation shows the reduction re- quired by § 63.138(b), (c), (e), (f), or (g), as appropriate, is achieved; and during the performance test or design evaluation for a biological treatment process, you establish operating limits for TSS, BOD, and biomass concentration in accordance with your dis- charge permit; and for a nonbiological treat- ment unit, you establish appropriate oper- ating limits described in your approved Precompliance report; and you have a record of how you established the operating limits. a. Treatment in a design steam stripper i.e., You document in your notification of compli- § 63.138(d)) or a treatment unit in ance status that you treat wastewater in a § 63.8010(f). design steam stripper or a treatment unit specified in § 63.8010(f).
VerDate 11
TABLE 10 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER STREAMS, WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS, AND LIQUID STREAMS IN OPEN SYSTEMS WITHIN MIS- CELLANEOUS COATING MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS—Continued
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For each * * * For the following standard * * * ***
4. Residual removed from an affected waste- Control emissions ...... You comply with the requirements in entries water stream. (a) and (b) of this table for all waste man- agement units used to convey, store, treat, or dispose of the residual; and you comply with one or more of the following: the re- quirements in entry 3. of this table for each residual that you treat in accordance with the requirements specified in § 63.138(k)(3); install equipment or establish procedures to recycle the residual to a production proc- ess, sell it for recycling, or return it to the treatment process; or you document in the notification of compliance status that you are treating the residual in a unit under § 63.8010(f). 5. Maintenance wastewater stream...... Develop and implement a maintenance You developed the plan and have it available wastewater plan. onsite for inspection at any time after the compliance date. 6. Liquid stream in open systems within mis- Comply with the requirements in Table 35 of Document in the notification of compliance cellaneous coating manufacturing operations.. subpart G, according to entry 6. in Table 2 status the type of control you are using. of this subpart.
As required in §§ 63.8025(a), (b), and (c), 63.8030(a), and 63.8040(a), you must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission limitation and work practice standard that applies to your storage tanks as specified in the following table:
TABLE 11 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR STORAGE TANKS
You have demonstrated initial compliance For*** For the following standard*** if***
1. Each affected storage tank ...... a. Operate and maintain a floating roof, or ..... You have a record of the vessel dimensions and capacity and identification of the liquid stored as specified in § 63.1065(a); and you inspect an IFR before initial filling and in- spect an EFR within 90 days of initial filling. b. Vent emissions through a closed-vent sys- You conduct a design evaluation or perform- tem to a control device that reduces HAP ance test in accordance with the require- emissions by ≥90 percent by weight, or. ments specified in § 63.985(b); and the per- formance test or design evaluation shows the control device reduces HAP emissions by ≥90 percent by weight; and during the performance test or design evaluation, you establish operating limits for the control de- vices specified in Table 7 of this subpart, as applicable; according to § 63.8030(d), (e), or (f); and you have a record of how you established the operating limits. c. Vent emissions through a closed-vent sys- You conduct an initial flare compliance as- tem to a flare that meets the performance sessment as specified in §§ 63.987(b)(3) requirements of § 63.11(b), or and 63.997; and the visible emissions net hearting value, and exit velocity meet the requirements specified in § 63.11(b)(4), (6), and (7). d. Vapor balance ...... You document in the notification of compli- ance status that you are complying by vapor balancing and certify that the pres- sure relief device setting on the storage tank is ≥2.5 psig on the compliance date; and for the owner or operator of a reloading or cleaning facility, you: submit the written certification required by § 63.1253(b)(7)(i); and if you use a closed-vent system and control device to control emissions, you comply with entry 1.b. of this table.
VerDate 11
As required in §§ 63.8025 (a), (b), and (c), 63.8030(a), 63.8040(a), and 63.8055(b)(6), you must demonstrate initial compliance with each work practice standard that applies to your equipment leaks, closed-vent systems, and heat exchange systems as specified in the following table:
TABLE 12 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR EQUIPMENT LEAKS, CLOSED-VENT SYSTEMS, AND HEAT EXCHANGE SYSTEMS
You have demonstrated initial compliance For each*** For the following standard*** if***
1. Piece of equipment in organic HAP service Comply with §§ 63.1022 and 63.1024 through You implemented an LDAR program by the and not described in § 63.1019 (c) through 63.1037. compliance date. (e). 2. Piece of equipment in organic HAP service Identify the equipment as specified in You create a list with the required identifica- <300 hr/yr. § 63.1022(b)(5). tion record by the compliance date. 3. Closed-vent system...... Inspection equipment to identify and repair You conduct an initial inspection of the leaks. closed-vent system and maintain records in accordance with § 63.983(b) and (c) by the compliance date; and you prepare a written plan for inspecting unsafe-to-inspect and difficult-to-inspect equipment in accordance with § 63.983(b) and (b) by the compliance date; and you repair any leaks and maintain records in accordance with § 63.983(d). 4. Closed-vent system with a bypass line that Prevent flow through the bypass line ...... You document in the notification of compli- could divert streams away from a control de- ance status that you either installed a flow vice. indicator or that you secured the bypass line valve in accordance with entry d. in Table 4 of this subpart. 5. Heat exchange system used to cool process Monitor for and repair leaks ...... You determine that the heat exchange system equipment or materials in miscellaneous is exempt from monitoring requirements be- coating manufacturing operations. cause it meets one of the conditions in § 63.104(a)(1) through (6), and you docu- ment this finding in your notification of com- pliance status; or if your heat exchange system is not exempt, you either: identify in your notification of compliance status the HAP or other representative substance that you will monitor; or prepare and maintain a monitoring plan containing the information required by § 63.104(c)(1)(i) through (iv) that documents the procedures you will use to detect leaks by monitoring surrogate indi- cators of the leak.
As required in §§ 63.8025(a), (b), and (c), 63.8030(a), and 63.8040(a), you must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission limitation and work practice standard that applies to your transfer operations as specified in the following table:
TABLE 13 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR TRANSFER OPERATIONS
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For * * * For the following standard * * * ***
1. Transfer operations ...... a. Vapor balance, or ...... You document in the Notification of Compli- ance Status that you are complying with vapor balancing. b. Route emissions through a closed-vent You conduct an initial flare compliance as- system to a flare that meets the perform- sessment as specified in §§ 63.987(b)(3) ance requirements of § 63.11(b), or and 63.997; and the visible emissions, net heating value, and exit velocity meet the re- quirements specified in § 63.11(b)(4), (6), and (7).
VerDate 11
TABLE 13 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR TRANSFER OPERATIONS—Continued
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For * * * For the following standard * * * ***
c. Route emissions through a closed-vent sys- You conduct a design evaluation or perform- tem to a control device that reduces HAP ance test according to the requirements of by ≥98 percent by weight, or to an outlet § 63.985(b); and the performance test or total organic HAP or TOC concentration design evaluation shows the HAP emis- and outlet hydrogen halide and halogen sions are reduced by ≥98 percent by concentration ≤20 ppmv, or weight, or the emissions are reduced to outlet total organic HAP or TOC concentra- tions ≤20 ppmv as TOC and ≤20 ppmv of hydrogen halides and halogens, both cor- rected for supplemental gases in accord- ance with § 63.8030(g); and during the per- formance test or design and evaluation, you establish operating limits for the control de- vices specified in Table 7 of this subpart, as applicable, in accordance with § 63.8030(d), (e), and (f); and you have a record of how you determined the operating limits. d. Route emissions through a closed-vent You document in the notification of compli- system to a control device specified in ance status that you route emissions to a § 63.8010(f). device specified in § 63.8010(f).
As required in §§ 63.8025(a), (b), and (c), 63.8030(a), 63.8040(a), and 63.8055(b)(5), you must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission limitation that applies to your halogenated vent streams that are controlled with a combustion device as specified in the following table:
TABLE 14 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS FOR HALOGENATED VENT STREAMS CONTROLLED WITH A COMBUSTION DEVICE
You have demonstrated initial compliance if For each * * * For the following standard * * * ***
Halogenated vent stream ...... Use a halogen reduction device after the You conduct a performance test according to combustion device to reduce emissions of the procedures specified in § 63.997; and hydrogen halides and halogens by ≥95 per- the performance test shows the halides and cent by weight or to ≤20 ppmv. hydrogen emissions are reduced by at ≥95 percent by weight or to ≤20 ppmv; and you establish operating imits for the halogen re- duction device during the performance test, and you have a record of how you deter- mine the limits.
As required in §§ 63.8050(a) and 63.8080(c), you must demonstrate continuous compliance with each emission limita- tion that applies to you as specified in the following table:
TABLE 15 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—CONTINUOUS COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS
You must demonstrate continuous compliance For each * * * For the following standard * * * by * * *
Vent stream controlled with a condenser ...... Percent reduction or outlet concentration ...... Collecting the condenser outlet temperature according to § 63.8035(b); and reducing condenser outlet temperature data to daily or block averages according to calculations in § 63.8035(b); and maintaining the daily average condenser outlet temperature no higher than the level established during the initial performance test or design evalua- tion.
As required in §§ 63.8050(a), 63.8055(c)(1)(iv)(B), and 63.8080(c), you must demonstrate continuous compliance with each operating limit that applies to you as specified in the following table:
VerDate 11
TABLE 16 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—CONTINUOUS COMPLIANCE WITH OPERATING LIMITS
You must demonstrate operating continuous For each * * * For the following operating limit * * * compliance by * * *
1. Thermal incinerator that is used to control an Temperature of gases exiting the comubstion Collecting the temperature data according to emission stream subject to an emission limi- chamber. § 63.8035(b); and reducing the temperature tation and that has inlet HAP emissions emis- data to daily or block averages according to sions ≥1 ton/yr. calculations in § 63.8035(b); and maintain- ing the daily or block average temperature of gases exiting the combustion chamber no lower than the value established during the initial performance test or design eval- uation. 2. Catalytic incinerator that is used to control an Temperature of the gas stream immediately Collecting the temperature data according to emission stream subject to an emission limi- before the catalyst bed and, if applicable, § 63.8035(b); and reducing the inlet tem- tation and that has inlet HAP emissions ≥1 the temperature difference across the cata- perature data to daily or block averages ac- ton/yr. lyst bed. cording to calculations in § 63.8035(b); and maintaining the daily or block average tem- perature of the gas stream immediately be- fore the catalyst bed no lower than the value established during the initial perform- ance test or design evaluation; and if appli- cable, maintaining the quarterly reading of the temperature difference across the cata- lyst bed no lower than 90 percent of the value established during the initial compli- ance determination. 3. Boiler or process heater that is used to con- Temperature of the gases exiting the combus- Collecting the temperature data according to trol an emission stream that is subject to an tion chamber. § 63.8035(b); and reducing the temperature emission limitation, that has inlet HAP emis- data to daily or block averages according to sions ≥1 ton/yr, and for which the vent calculations in § 63.8035(b); and maintain- streams are not introduced with the primary ing the daily or block average temperature fuel or the design heat input capacity is <44 of the gas stream exiting the combustion MW. chamber no lower than the value estab- lished during the initial performance test or design evaluation. 4. Regenerative carbon adsorber that has inlet The regeneration frequency, temperature to Collecting the data for each regeneration emission streams containing ≥1 ton/yr of which the bed is heated during regenera- cycle; and conducting inspections, compli- HAP. tion, temperature to which the bed is cooled ance checks, and calibrations according to within 15 minutes of the completion of the § 63.8035(b)(4); and for regeneration cycle, cooling phase, and the regeneration stream maintaining the regeneration frequency, flow rate. temperature to which the bed is heated dur- ing regeneration, temperature to which the bed is cooled within 15 minutes of the com- pletion of the cooling phase, and the regen- eration stream flow rate within the operating levels established during the initial perform- ance test or design evaluation. 5. Water scrubber with inlet HAP emissions ≥1 Scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure drop ...... Collecting the flow rate or pressure drop or ton/yr. pressure drop data according to § 63.8035(b); and reducing the flow rate or pressure drop data according to § 63.8035(b); and maintaining the daily or block average flow rate or pressure drop no lower than the value established during the initial performance test or design evalua- tion. 6. Caustic scrubber with inlet HAP ≥1 ton/yr ..... Scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure drop; Collecting the scrubber liquid flow rate or and pH of the scrubber effluent. pressure drop data according to § 63.8035(b); and collecting the scrubber ef- fluent pH data according to § 63.8035(b); and reducing the scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure drop data to daily or block aver- ages according to calculations in § 63.8035(b); and reducing the scrubber ef- fluent pH data to daily or block averages according to the calculations in § 63.8035(b); and maintaining the daily or block average scrubber liquid flow rate or pressure drop, and the daily or block aver- age scrubber effluent pH, no lower than the values established during the initial per- formance test or design evaluation.
VerDate 11
TABLE 16 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—CONTINUOUS COMPLIANCE WITH OPERATING LIMITS—Continued
You must demonstrate operating continuous For each * * * For the following operating limit * * * compliance by * * *
7. Control device with inlet HAP emissions <1 As identified in your Precompliance report ...... Following the procedures in your approved ton/yr for which you received approval to Precompliance report to verify on a daily or comply with operating limits different from block basis that the control device is oper- those described in entries (a) through (f) of ating properly. this table. 8. Design steam stripper ...... Steam-to-wastewater ratio, wastewater tem- Collecting the steam mass ratio, wastewater perature, and wastewater loading. flow rate, wastewater (or column operating) temperature data according to § 63.8035(b); and reducing the data to daily or block averages according to § 63.8035(b); and maintaining the steam-to-wastewater ratio ≥0.04 kg/liter, the wastewater temperature (or column operating temperature) ≥95°C, and the wastewater loading ≤67,100 liters per hour per square meter. 9. Nonbiological treatment unit, except a design Parameters as approved by permitting author- Collecting and reducing data as specified by steam stripper. ity. the permitting authority and maintaining pa- rameter levels within the limits approved by the permitting authority. 10. Biological treatment unit ...... TSS, BOD, and the biomass concentration .... Collecting the data at the frequency approved by the permitting authority and using meth- ods approved by the permitting authority. Maintaining the TSS, BOD, and biomass concentration within levels approved by the permitting authority.
As required in §§ 63.8050(a), 63.8055(c)(4), and 63.8080(c), you must demonstrate continuous compliance with each work practice standard that applies to you as specified in the following table:
TABLE 17 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—CONTINUOUS COMPLIANCE WITH WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS
For the following work practice standard * * * You must demonstrate continuous compliance by * * *
1. Install a floating roof on a storage tank ...... Conducting the inspections in § 63.1063(d) at the frequency specified in § 63.1063(c); and repairing any failures detected during the in- spection as specified in § 63.1063(e); and maintaining records of in- spections, repairs, floating roof landings, and vessel dimensions and capacity as specified in § 63.1065. 2. Install emission suppression equipment for waste management units Conducting semi-annual visual inspections of each fixed roof, cover, as specified in §§ 63.133 through 63.137. and enclosure for visible, audible, or olfactory indications of leaks as specified in §§ 63.133 through 63.137; and conducting inspections, repairing failures, and documenting delay or repair for each fixed roof, cover, and enclosure as specified in §§ 63.133 through 63.137; and maintain records failures and corrective actions; and for each floating roof installed on a wastewater tank, conducting inspections, repairing failures, and maintaining records as specified in entry 1. of this table for storage tanks. 3. Implement the LDAR requirements in §§ 63.1025 through 63.1037 ... Performing the required monitoring on the required schedule, repairing leaks within the specified time period according to § 63.1025 through 63.1037; and keeping records according to § 63.1038(b). 4. Vent transfer operation emissions back to the process or originating Conducting annual inspections, repairing leaks, and recording results in vessel. accordance with the requirements for closed-vent systems in entries (h) and (i) of this table. 5. Controlling emissions with a flare ...... Continuously monitoring for the presence of pilot flame as specified in § 63.987(c) and keeping records of the monitoring results as speci- fied in § 63.998(a)(1). 6. Controlling emissions with a nonregenerative carbon adsorber ...... Monitoring the operating time during which the carbon adsorber is used; and replacing the cannister within the time interval established during the initial compliance determination. 7. Cover liquid streams in open systems within the miscellaneous coat- Complying with entry 2. of this table. ing manufacturing operations. 8. Inspect closed-vent systems...... Conducting the inspections and maintaining records according to § 63.983(b) and (c) and repairing leaks according to § 63.983(d).
VerDate 11
TABLE 17 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—CONTINUOUS COMPLIANCE WITH WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS—Continued
For the following work practice standard * * * You must demonstrate continuous compliance by * * *
9. Monitor bypass lines in close-vent systems ...... If using a flow indicator, ensuring that flow indicator readings are taken at least once every 15 minutes, maintaining hourly records of wheth- er the flow indicator was operating and whether a diversion was de- tected at any time during the hour, recording all periods when the vent stream is diverted from the control stream or the flow indicator is not operating; or if you secure the bypass line valve in the closed- position, maintain a record that the monthly visual inspection of the seal or closure mechanism has been done; and recording the occur- rence of all periods when the seal mechanism is broken, the bypass line valve position has changed, or the key for a lock-and-key type lock has been checked out. 10. Develop and implement maintenance wastewater plan ...... Implementing the procedures in the plan for each wastewater stream according to § 63.105(d), modifying and updating the procedures as needed according to § 63.105(c), and maintaining records of the plan and updates according to § 63.105(e). 11. Vapor balancing for storage tanks ...... Operating and monitoring the vapor balancing system as specified in § 63.1253(f)(1) through (5), maintaining a record of DOT certifications required by § 63.1253(f)(2), and maintaining a record of the pressure relief vent setting that shows it is ≥2.5 psig; and if you are the owner or operator of a reloading or cleaning facility, controlling emissions from reloading or cleaning as specified in § 63.1253(f)(6) and (7). 12. Monitor outlet gas temperature for condensers used to control Collecting the condenser outlet temperature according to § 63.8035(b); vents from process vessels that receive material with HAP partial and reducing condensor outlet temperature data to daily or block pressures in ranges specified in Table 1 of this subpart. averages according to calculations in § 63.8035(b); and maintaining the daily average condenser outlet temperature no higher than the level specified in Table 1 of this subpart for the applicable HAP par- tial pressure. 13. Inspect and repair heat exchange system ...... Monitoring for HAP compounds, other substances, or surrogate indica- tors at the frequency specified in § 63.104(b) or (c), repairing leaks within the time period specified in § 63.104(d)(1), confirming that the repair is successful as specified in § 63.104(d)(2), following the pro- cedures in § 63.104(e) if you implement delay of repair, and record- ing the results of inspections and repair according to § 63.104(f)(1). 14. Conduct annual catalyst test for catalytic incinerators ...... Conducting a catalyst test once per year that shows the activity of the catalyst is acceptable.
As required in § 63.8075(a) and (b), you must submit each report that applies to you on the schedule shown in the following table:
TABLE 18 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—REQUIREMENTS FOR REPORTS
You must submit a(n) The report must contain * * * You must submit the report * * *
1. Precompliance report ...... The information specified in § 63.8075(c) ...... At least 6 months prior to the compliance date; or for new sources, with the applica- tion for approval of construction or recon- struction. 2. Compliance report ...... The information specified in § 63.8075(d) ...... Semiannually according to the requirements in § 63.8075(b). 3. Immediate startup, shutdown, and malfunc- a. Actions taken for the event, and ...... By fax or telephone within 2 working days tion report if you had a startup, shutdown, or after starting actions inconsistent with the malfunction during the reporting period that is plan. not consistent with your startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan. b. The information in § 63.10(d)(5)(ii) ...... By letter within 7 working days after the end of the event unless you have made alter- native arrangements with the permitting au- thority (§ 63.10(d)(5)(ii)).
As specified in § 63.8095, the parts of the General Provisions that apply to you are shown in the following table:
TABLE 19 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (SUBPART A) TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63.
Citation Subject Brief description Explanation
§ 63.1 ...... Applicability ...... Initial Applicability Determination; Yes. Applicability After Standard Es- tablished; Permit Require- ments; Extensions, Notifications.
VerDate 11
TABLE 19 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (SUBPART A) TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63.—Continued
Citation Subject Brief description Explanation
§ 63.2 ...... Definitions ...... Definitions for part 63 standards .. Yes. § 63.3 ...... Units and Abbreviations ...... Units and abbreviations for part Yes. 63 standards. § 63.4 ...... Prohibited Activities ...... Prohibited Activities; Compliance Yes. date; Circumvention, Sever- ability. § 63.5 ...... Construction/Reconstruction ...... Applicability; Applications; Ap- Yes. provals. § 63.6(a) ...... Applicability ...... GP apply unless compliance ex- Yes. tension GP apply to area sources that become major. § 63.6(b)(1)–(4) ...... Compliance Dates for New and Standards apply at effective date; Yes. Reconstructed sources. 3 years after effective date; upon startup; 10 years after construction or reconstruction commences for section 112(f). § 63.6(b)(5) ...... Notification ...... Must notify if commenced con- Yes. struction or reconstruction after proposal. § 63.6(b)(6) ...... [Reserved]. § 63.6(b)(7) ...... Compliance Dates for New and Area sources that become major Yes. Reconstructed Area Sources must comply with major source That Become Major. standards immediately upon becoming major, regardless of whether required to comply when they were an area source. § 63.6(c)(1)–(2) ...... Compliance Dates for Existing Comply according to date in sub- Yes. Sources. part, which must be no later than 3 years after effective date; For section 112(f) stand- ards, comply within 90 days of effective date unless compli- ance extension. § 63.6(c)(3)–(4) ...... [Reserved]. § 63.6(c)(5) ...... Compliance Dates for Existing Area sources that become major Yes. Area Sources That Become must comply with major source Major. standards by date indicated in subpart or by equivalent time period (for example, 3 years). § 63.6(d) ...... [Reserved]. § 63.6(e)(1)–(2) ...... Operation & Maintenance ...... Operate to minimize emissions at Yes. all times; Correct malfunctions as soon as practicable; Oper- ation and maintenance require- ments independently enforce- able; information Administrator will use to determine if oper- ation and maintenance require- ments were met. § 63.6(e)(3) ...... Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunc- Requirement for SSM and start- Yes. tion Plan (SSMP). up, shutdown, malfunction plan; Content of SSMP. § 63.6(f)(1) ...... Compliance Except During SSM You must comply with emission Yes. standards at all times except during SSM. § 63.6(f)(2)–(3) ...... Methods for Determining Compli- Compliance based on perform- Yes. ance. ance test, operation and main- tenance plans, records, inspec- tion. § 63.6(g)(1)–(3) ...... Alternative Standard...... Procedures for getting an alter- Yes. native standard. § 63.6(h) ...... Opacity/Visible Emission (VE) Requirements for opacity and Only for flares for which Method Standards. visible emission limits. 22 observations are required as part of a flare compliance as- sessment. § 63.6(i)(1)–(14) ...... Compliance Extension ...... Procedures and criteria for Ad- Yes. ministrator to grant compliance extension.
VerDate 11
TABLE 19 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (SUBPART A) TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63.—Continued
Citation Subject Brief description Explanation
§ 63.6(j) ...... Presidential Compliance Exemp- President may exempt source Yes. tion. category from requirement to comply with rule. § 63.7(a)(1)–(2) ...... Performance Test Dates ...... Dates for conducting initial per- Yes, except that § 63.8025(a) formance testing and other specifies that you must conduct compliance demonstrations; initial compliance demonstra- must conduct 180 days after tions before the compliance first subject to rule. date for existing sources in op- eration before the effective date. § 63.7(a)(3) ...... Section 114 Authority ...... Administrator may require a per- Yes. formance test under CAA sec- tion 114 at any time. § 63.7(b)(1) ...... Notification of Performance Test Must notify Administrator 60 days Yes. before the test. § 63.7(b)(2) ...... Notification of Rescheduling...... If rescheduling a performance Yes. test is necessary, must notify Administrator 5 days before scheduled date of rescheduled date. § 63.7(c) ...... Quality Assurance/Test Plan...... Requirement to submit site-spe- Yes, except the test plan must be cific test plan 60 days before submitted with the notification the test or on date Adminis- of the performance test if the trator agrees with. control device controls process vessels. Test plan approval procedures; Performance audit require- ments; Internal and External QA procedures for testing. § 63.7(d) ...... Testing Facilities ...... Requirements for testing facilities Yes. § 63.7(e)(1) ...... Conditions for Conducting Per- Performance tests must be con- Yes, except that performance formance tests. ducted under representative tests for process vessels must conditions; cannot conduct per- be conducted under worst-case formance tests during SSM; not conditions as specified in a violation to exceed standard § 63.8030 and Table 9 to this during SSM. subpart. § 63.7(e)(2) ...... Conditions for Conducting Per- Must conduct according to rule Yes. formance Tests. and EPA test methods unless Administrator approves alter- native. § 63.7(e)(3) ...... Test Run Duration ...... Must have three test runs of at Yes. least 1 hour each; Compliance is based on arithmetic mean of three runs; Conditions when data from an additional test run can be used. § 63.7(f) ...... Alternative Test Method...... Procedures by which Adminis- Yes. trator can grant approval to use an alternative test method. § 63.7(g) ...... Performance Test Data Analysis Must include raw data in perform- Yes. ance test report; Must submit performance test data 60 days after end of test with the Notifi- cation of Compliance Status; Keep data for 5 years. § 63.7(h) ...... Waiver of Tests...... Procedures for Administrator to Yes. waive performance test. § 63.8(a)(1) ...... Applicability of Monitoring Re- Subject to all monitoring require- Yes. quirements. ments in standard. § 63.8(a)(2) ...... Performance Specifications ...... Performance Specifications in ap- Yes. pendix B of part 60 apply. § 63.8(a)(3) ...... [Reserved]. § 63.8(a)(4) ...... Monitoring with Flares ...... Unless your rule says otherwise, Yes. the requirements for flares in § 63.11 apply. § 63.8(b)(1) ...... Monitoring ...... Must conduct monitoring accord- Yes. ing to standard unless Adminis- trator approves alternative.
VerDate 11
TABLE 19 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (SUBPART A) TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63.—Continued
Citation Subject Brief description Explanation
§ 63.8(b)(2)–(3) ...... Multiple Effluents and Multiple Specific requirements for install- Yes. Monitoring Systems. ing monitoring systems; Must install on each effluent before it is combined and before it is re- leased to the atmosphere un- less Administrator approves otherwise; If more than one monitoring system on an emis- sion point, must report all moni- toring system results, unless one monitoring system is a backup. § 63.8(c)(1) ...... Monitoring System Operation and Maintain monitoring system in a Yes. Maintenance. manner consistent with good air pollution control practices. § 63.8(c)(1)(i) ...... Routine and Predictable SSM ...... Follow the SSM plan for routine Yes. repairs keep parts for routine repairs readily available; report- ing requirements for SSM when action is described in SSM plan. § 63.8(c)(1)(ii) ...... SSM not in SSMP ...... Reporting requirements for SSM Yes. when action is not described in SSM plan. § 63.8(c)(1)(iii) ...... Compliance with Operation and How Administrator determines if Yes. Maintenance Requirements. source complying with oper- ation and maintenance require- ments; Review of source O&M procedures, records, Manufac- turer’s instructions, rec- ommendations, and inspection of monitoring system. § 63.8(c)(2)–(3) ...... Monitoring System Installation ..... Must install to get representative Yes. emission and parameter meas- urements; Must verify oper- ational status before or at per- formance test. § 63.8(c)(4) ...... CMS must be operating except No. CMS requriements are speci- during breakdown, out-of-con- fied in § 63.8045.. trol, repair, maintenance, and high-level calibration drifts. § 63.8(c)(4)(i)–(ii) ...... CMS Requirements...... Continuous opacity monitoring Only for the alternative standard, systems (COMS) must have a but § 63.8(c)(4)(i) does not minimum of one cycle of sam- apply because the alternat4ive pling and analysis for each suc- standard does not require cessive 10-second period and COMS. one cycle of data recording for each successive 6-minute pe- riod; CEMS must have a min- imum of one cycle of operation for each successive 15-minute period. § 63.8(c)(5) ...... COMS Minimum Procedures ...... COMS minimum procedures ...... No. Subpart HHHHH does not contain opacity or VE limits. § 63.8(c)(6) ...... CMS Requirements...... Zero and High level calibration Only for the alternative standard check requirements; Out-of- in § 63.8055. control periods. § 63.8(c)(7)–(8) ...... CMS Requirements...... Out-of-Control period, including No, except for the alternative reporting. standard in § 63.8055. § 63.8(d) ...... CMS Quality Control...... Requirements for CMS quality Only for the alternative standard control, including calibration, in § 63.8055. etc. Must keep quality control plan on record for 5 years. Keep old versions for 5 years after revisions.
VerDate 11
TABLE 19 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (SUBPART A) TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63.—Continued
Citation Subject Brief description Explanation
§ 63.8(e) ...... CMS Performance Evaluation ...... Notification, performance evalua- Only for the alternative standard tion test plan, reports. in § 63.8055, but § 63.8(e)(5)(ii) does not apply because the al- ternative standard does not re- quire COMS. For existing sources, the performance eval- uation must be completed prior to the compliance date, and the results must be included in the Notification of Compliance Sta- tus. § 63.8(f)(1)–(5) ...... Alternative Monitoring Method ..... Procedures for Administrator to Yes, except you may also request approve alternative monitoring. approval using the Precompliance report. § 63.8(f)(6) ...... Alternative to Relative Accuracy Procedures for Administrator to Only for the alternative standard Test. approve alternative relative ac- in § 63.8055. curacy tests for CEMS. § 63.8(g)(1)–(4) ...... Data Reduction...... COMS 6-minute averages cal- Only for the alternative standard culated over at least 36 evenly in § 63.8055, except that the re- spaced data points; CEMS 1- quirements for COMS do not hour averages computed over apply because subpart HHHHH at least 4 equally spaced points. has no opacity or VE limits, and § 63.8(g)(2) does not apply because data reduction require- ments are specified in § 63.8035(a)(5). § 63.8(g)(5) ...... Data Reduction ...... Data that can’t be used in com- No. Data reduction procedures puting averages for CEMS and are specified in § 63.8045(b) COMS. § 63.9(a) ...... Notification Requirements ...... Applicability and State Delegation Yes. § 63.9(b)(1)–(5) ...... Initial Notifications ...... Submit notification 120 days after Yes. effective date; Notification of in- tent to construct/reconstruct; Notification of commencement of construct/reconstruct; Notifi- cation of startup; Contents of each notification. § 63.9(c) ...... Request for Compliance Exten- Can request if cannot comply by Yes. sion. date or if installed BACT/LAER. § 63.9(d) ...... Notification of Special Compli- For sources that commence con- Yes. ance Requirements for New struction between proposal and Source. promulgation and want to com- ply 3 years after effective date. § 63.9(e) ...... Notification of Performance Test Notify Administrator 60 days prior Yes. § 63.9(f) ...... Notification of VE/Opacity Test .... Notify Administrator 30 days prior No. Subpart HHHHH does not contain opacity or VE limits. § 63.9(g) ...... Additional Notifications When Notification of performance eval- Only for the alternative standard Using CMS. uation; Notification using in § 63.8055. COMS data; Notification that exceeded criterion for relative accuracy. § 63.9(h)(1)–(6) ...... Notification of Compliance Status Contents Due 60 days after end Yes, except subpart HHHHH has of performance test or other no opacity or VE limits, and compliance demonstration, ex- § 63.8070(e)(1) specifies that cept for opacity/VE, which are the Notification of Compliance due 30 days after; When to Status is due by the compli- submit to Federal vs. State au- ance date for existing sources thority. in operation prior to the effec- tive date, and 63.8070(e)(2) specifies that the Notification of Compliance Status is due with- in 240 days after the compli- ance date for all other affected sources. § 63.9(i) ...... Adjustment of Submittal Dead- Procedures for Administrator to Yes. lines. approve change in when notifi- cations must be submitted. § 63.9(j) ...... Change in Previous Information .. Must submit within 15 days after Yes. change.
VerDate 11
TABLE 19 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (SUBPART A) TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63.—Continued
Citation Subject Brief description Explanation
§ 63.10(a) ...... Recordkeeping/Reporting ...... Applies to all, unless compliance Yes. extension; When to submit to Federal vs. State authority; Procedures for owners of more than 1 source. § 63.10(b)(1) ...... Recordkeeping/Reporting ...... General Requirements. Keep all Yes. records readily available; Keep for 5 years. § 63.10(b)(2)(i)–(iv) ...... Records related to Startup, Shut- Occurrence of each of operation Yes. down, and Malfunction. (process equipment); Occur- rence of each malfunction of air pollution equipment; Mainte- nance on air pollution control equipment; Actions during start- up, shutdown, and malfunction. § 63.10(b)(2)(vi) and (x)–(xi) ...... CMS Records ...... Malfunctions, inoperative, out-of- Yes. control; Calibration checks; Ad- justments, maintenance. § 63.10(b)(2)(vii)–(ix) ...... Records ...... Measurements to demonstrate Yes. compliance with emission limi- tations; Performance test, per- formance evaluation, and visi- ble emission observation re- sults; Measurements to deter- mine conditions of performance tests and performance evalua- tions. § 63.10(b)(2)(xii) ...... Records ...... Records when under waiver ...... Yes. § 63.10(b)(2)(xiii) ...... Records ...... Records when using alternative to Only for the alternative standard relative accuracy test. in § 63.8055. § 63.10(b)(2)(xiv) ...... Records ...... All documentation supporting Ini- Yes. tial Notification and Notification of Compliance Status. § 63.10(b)(3) ...... Records ...... Applicability Determinations ...... Yes § 63.10(c)(1)–(6),(9)–(15) ...... Records ...... Additional Records for CMS ...... Only for the alternative standard in § 63.8055. § 63.10(c)(7)–(8) ...... Records ...... Records of excess emissions and No. Recordkeeping requirements parameter monitoring are specified in § 63.8080. exceedances for CMS (now de- fined as deviations). § 63.10(d)(1) ...... General Reporting Requirements Requirement to report ...... Yes. § 63.10(d)(2) ...... Report of Performance Test Re- When to submit to Federal or Yes. sults. State authority. § 63.10(d)(3) ...... Reporting Opacity or VE Obser- What to report and when ...... No. Subpart HHHHH does not vations. contain opacity or VE limits. § 63.10(d)(4) ...... Progress Reports ...... Must submit progress reports on Yes. schedule if under compliance extension. § 63.10(d)(5) ...... Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunc- Contents and submission ...... Yes. tion Reports. § 63.10(e)(1)–(2) ...... Additional CMS Reports ...... Must report results for each CEM Only for the alternative standard on a unit; Written copy of per- in § 63.8055, but formance evaluation; 3 copies § 63.10(e)(2)(ii) does not apply of COMS performance evalua- because the alternative stand- tion. ard does not require COMS. § 63.10(e)(3) ...... Reports ...... Excess Emission Reports ...... No. Reporting requirements are specified in § 63.8075. § 63.10(e)(3)(i)–(iii) ...... Reports ...... Schedule for reporting excess No. Reporting requirements are emissions and parameter mon- specified in § 63.8075. itor exceedance (now defined as deviations).
VerDate 11
TABLE 19 TO SUBPART HHHHH.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS (SUBPART A) TO SUBPART HHHHH OF PART 63.—Continued
Citation Subject Brief description Explanation
§ 63.10(e)(3)(iv)–(v) ...... Excess Emissions Reports ...... Requirement to revert to quarterly No. Reporting requirements are submission if there is an ex- specified in § 63.8075. cess emissions and parameter monitor exceedance (now de- fined as deviations); Provision to request semiannual reporting after compliance for one year; Submit report by 30th day fol- lowing end of quarter or cal- endar half; If there has not been an exceedance or excess emission (now defined as devi- ations); report contents is a statement that there have been no deviations. § 63.10(e)(3)(iv)–(v) ...... Excess Emissions Reports ...... Must submit report containing all No. Reporting requirements are of the information in specified in § 63.8075. § 63.10(c)(5)–(13), § 63.8(c)(7)– (8). § 63.10(e)(3)(vi–viii) ...... Excess Emissions Report and Requirements for reporting ex- No. Reporting requirements are Summary Report. cess emissions for CMSs (now specified in § 63.8075. called deviations) Requires all of the information in § 63.10(c)(5–13), § 63.8(c)(7–8). § 63.10(e)(4) ...... Reporting COMS data ...... Must submit COMS data with per- No. Subpart HHHHH does not formance test data. contain opacity or VE limits. § 63.10(f) ...... Waiver for Recordkeeping/Report- Procedures for Administrator to Yes. ing. waive. § 63.11 ...... Flares ...... Requirements for flares ...... Yes. § 63.12 ...... Delegation ...... State authority to enforce stand- Yes. ards. § 63.13 ...... Addresses ...... Addresses where reports, notifi- Yes. cations, and requests are sent. § 63.14 ...... Incorporation by Reference ...... Test methods incorporated by ref- Yes. erence. § 63.15 ...... Availability of Information ...... Public and confidential informa- Yes. tion.
[FR Doc. 02–5077 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate 11
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Parts 148, 261, et al. Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Paint Production Wastes; Land Disposal Restrictions for Newly Identified Wastes; and CERCLA Hazardous Substance Designation and Reportable Quantities; Final Determination; Final Rule
VerDate 11
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION following a review of the public copy a maximum of 100 pages from any AGENCY comments and supplemental analyses regulatory docket at no charge. based on public comments, EPA has Additional copies cost $0.15/page. The 40 CFR Parts 148, 261, 268, 271, and determined that the paint wastes index and some supporting materials 302 identified in the February 13, 2001 are available electronically. See the proposal do not present a substantial beginning of the SUPPLEMENTARY [SWH–FRL–7167–8] hazard to human health or the INFORMATION section for information on RIN 2050–AE32 environment. Therefore, EPA is making accessing them. a final determination that these paint FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Hazardous Waste Management wastes are not listed hazardous wastes. general information, contact the RCRA System; Identification and Listing of Also, because the identified paint Hotline at (800) 424–9346 or TDD (800) Hazardous Waste; Paint Production wastes are not listed hazardous wastes, 553–7672 (hearing impaired). In the Wastes; Land Disposal Restrictions for EPA is not promulgating Land Disposal Washington, DC metropolitan area, call Newly Identified Wastes; and CERCLA Restriction (LDR) treatment standards (703) 412–9810 or TDD (703) 412–3323. Hazardous Substance Designation and for these wastes, designating these For information on specific aspects of Reportable Quantities; Final wastes as Comprehensive, the notice, contact Ms. Patricia Cohn of Determination Environmental Response, the Office of Solid Waste (5304W), U.S. Compensation, and Liability Act AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Environmental Protection (CERCLA) hazardous substances with Agency (EPA). Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, reportable quantities (RQs), or DC 20460. [E-mail address and ACTION: Final determination. designating any of the constituents in telephone number: these wastes as new Appendix VIII SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection [email protected], (703) 308–8675.] constituents. Agency (EPA) is issuing a final SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The determination not to list as hazardous EFFECTIVE DATE: May 6, 2002. docket index and some supporting certain wastes generated from the ADDRESSES: Supporting materials are documents in the docket for this production of paint. EPA is making this available for viewing in the RCRA determination are available in electronic determination under the Resource Information Center (RIC), located at format on the Internet at: http:// Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Crystal Gateway I, First Floor, 1235 www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/id/ which directs EPA to determine Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA. paint. whether certain wastes from the paint The Docket Identification Number is F– We will keep the official record for production industry may present a 2002–PMLF–FFFFF. The RIC is open this action in paper form. The official substantial hazard to human health or from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through record is the paper record maintained at the environment. EPA proposed Friday, excluding federal holidays. To the RCRA Information Center, also concentration-based listings for certain review docket materials, we recommend referred to as the Docket, at the address paint waste solids (K179) and liquids that you make an appointment by provided in the ADDRESSES section at (K180) on February 13, 2001. However, calling (703) 603–9230. The public may the beginning of this document.
ACRONYMS USED IN THE DOCUMENT
Acronym Definition
CAA ...... Clean Air Act. CERCLA ...... Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act. CFR ...... Code of Federal Regulations. CWT ...... Centralized Wastewater Treatment Facility (may also be referred to as a wastewater treatment facility, or WWTF). ED ...... Environmental Defense (previously Environmental Defense Fund or EDF). EO ...... Executive Order. EPA ...... Environmental Protection Agency. FR ...... Federal Register. HAP ...... Hazardous Air Pollutant. HQ ...... Hazard Quotient. HSWA ...... Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments. ICR ...... Information Collection Request. LDR ...... Land Disposal Restriction. MACT ...... Maximum Achievable Control Technology. mg/kg ...... Milligram per kilogram. MSDS ...... Material Safety Data Sheet. NAICS ...... North American Industrial Classification System. NESHAP ...... National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. NPDES ...... National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. NTTAA ...... National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act. AIM Rule ...... National Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Standards for Architectural Coatings and Industrial Maintenance Coatings (AIM) rule. OEM ...... Original Equipment Manufacturing. OSHA ...... Occupational Safety and Health Administration. OMB ...... Office of Management and Budget. OSWER ...... Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. POTW ...... Publicly Owned Treatment Works. ppm ...... Parts Per Million. RCRA ...... Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
VerDate 11
ACRONYMS USED IN THE DOCUMENT—Continued
Acronym Definition
RFA ...... Regulatory Flexibility Act. RfC ...... Reference Concentration. RFSA ...... Regulatory Flexibility Screening Analysis. RIC ...... RCRA Information Center. RQ ...... Reportable Quantity. SBA ...... Small Business Administration. SBREFA ...... Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. SIC ...... Standard Industry Code. TC ...... Toxicity Characteristic. TRI ...... Toxic Release Inventory. UMRA ...... Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. USC ...... United States Code. UTS ...... Universal Treatment Standard. VOC ...... Volatile Organic Compound.
The contents of this final 4. Statistical Design and Analysis of the VIII. The Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. determination are listed in the following RCRA Section 3007 Survey Data for 801 et. seq., as Added by the Small outline: Estimating Waste Quantities Business Regulatory Enforcement a. Use of the Dun and Bradstreet Database Fairness Act of 1996) I. Overview b. Original Statistical Design and Analysis A. Who Will be Affected by this Final of the RCRA Section 3007 Survey I. Overview Determination? c. Commenter’s Issues Concerning B. What is the ‘‘Readable Regulations’’ Incorrect Statistical Weights for Survey I. Who Will Be Affected by This Final Format? Responses Used to Calculate Waste Determination? C. What are the Statutory Authorities for Quantities this Final Determination? d. Post Survey Adjustments to Weights Beginning January 1, 1999 all D. Does this Final Determination Satisfy e. Adjusted Statistical Analyses of RCRA documents related to EPA’s regulatory, the Terms of the ED v. Whitman Consent Section 3007 Survey Data compliance and enforcement activities, Decree? 5. Concentration Levels for the Key including rules, policies, interpretive II. Summary of Today’s Action Constituents of Concern and the guidance, and site-specific Likelihood That They Occur in Wastes A. Waste Liquids from Paint determinations with broad application, 6. Conclusion for Paint Production Waste Manufacturing Solids should properly identify the regulated B. Waste Solids from Paint Manufacturing V. Analytical and Regulatory Requirements entities, including descriptions that III. Summary of Proposed Rule A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory correspond to the applicable SIC codes A. What Regulations did EPA Propose? Planning and Review or NAICS codes (source: October 9, 1998 B. What Paint Manufacturing Wastes are B. What Economic and Equity Analyses USEPA memo from Peter D. Robertson, Within the Scope of the Consent Decree Were Completed in Support of the Acting Deputy Administrator of for this Listing Determination? Proposed Listing for Paint Production USEPA). The proposed listing C. What Risk Assessment Approach Was Wastes? Used for the Proposed Rule? C. What Substantive Comments Were determination had the potential to affect D. Which Wastes did EPA Propose to List Received on the Cost/Economic Aspects manufacturers of paints and coatings, as as Hazardous? of the Proposed Listing for Paint well as those who handle the wastes, 1. Waste Solids from Paint Manufacturing Production Wastes? such as landfills. However, we have that Meet Certain Constituent D. What Are the Potential Costs and decided not to list these wastes as Concentration Levels (K179) Benefits of Today’s Final Determination? hazardous under Subtitle C of RCRA 2. Waste Liquids from Paint Manufacturing E. What Consideration Was Given to Small program. Therefore, today’s action will that Meet Certain Constituent Entities Under the Regulatory Flexibility not have any effect on any entities. Concentration Levels, Unless Managed Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Under Certain Conditions (K180) Business Regulatory Enforcement B. What Is the ‘‘Readable Regulations’’ IV. What is the Rationale for Today’s Final Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. Format? Determination? 601 et. seq.? A. What is the Basis for EPA’s Final F. Was the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Today’s final listing determination is Considered in this Final Determination? Determination Not to List Paint written in ‘‘readable regulations’’ G. Were Equity Issues and Children’s Production Waste Liquids? format, using: active rather than passive Health Considered in this Final 1. Management Scenario voice; plain language; a question-and- Determination? answer format; the pronouns ‘‘we’’ for 2. Estimates of Surface Impoundment Risks 1. Executive Order 13045: ‘‘Protection of Were Likely Overstated Children from Environmental Health EPA and ‘‘you’’ for the owner/generator; 3. Impact of Modeling Error Risks and Safety Risks’’ and other techniques to make the 4. Other Regulatory Programs 2. Executive Order 12898: Environmental information in today’s notice easier to 5. Conclusion for Paint Production Waste Justice read and understand. This format is part Liquids H. What Consideration Was Given to Tribal of our efforts toward regulatory re- B. What is the Basis for EPA’s Final Governments? invention. We believe this format helps Determination Not to List Paint I. Were Federalism Implications Production Waste Solids? readers understand the Agency’s Considered in Today’s Final regulatory decisions and regulations (if 1. Changes to the Risk Assessment Determination? 2. RCRA Section 3007 Survey of Paint J. Were Energy Impacts Considered? any), which should then increase Manufacturers VI. Paperwork Reduction Act compliance, make enforcement easier, 3. Interpretation and Aggregation of Waste VII. National Technology Transfer and and foster better relationships between Volumes and Management Practices Advancement Act of 1995 EPA and the regulated community.
VerDate 11
C. What Are the Statutory Authorities However, this determination does not in and 261.11(a)(3)(x)) are considered for for This Final Determination? any way affect the status of these wastes establishing the waste management We conducted this investigation and under existing hazardous waste listings. scenario(s) modeled in the risk listing determination under the Also, these wastes remain subject to a assessment. authority of Sections 2002(a), 3001(b), determination on whether or not they EPA conducted analyses of the risks 3001(e)(2), 3004(d)-(m) and 3007(a) of exhibit any of the hazardous waste posed by waste solids (K179) and waste the Solid Waste Disposal Act, 42 U.S.C. characteristics (see 40 CFR 261.21 liquids (K180) from the production of 6912(a), 6921(b) and (e)(2), 6924(d)- through 261.24). paint to assist in the determination of (m)and 6927(a), as amended several We apply the listing criteria described whether the wastes meet the criteria for times, most importantly by the in 40 CFR 261.11 to make listing listing set forth in 40 CFR 261.11(a)(3). Hazardous and Solid Waste determinations. We are making this In the preamble to the proposed rule (66 Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). These listing determination based on the third FR 10060), we discussed the human statutes commonly are referred to as the criterion (see 40 CFR 261.11(a)(3)), health risk analyses and ecological risk Resource Conservation and Recovery which includes a number of factors for screening analyses EPA conducted to Act (RCRA), and are codified at Volume consideration as are discussed below. support our proposed listing 42 of the United States Code (U.S.C.), We assessed and considered these determinations for K179 and K180. sections 6901 to 6992(k) (42 U.S.C. factors for each of the wastestreams These analyses, as well as comments 6901–6992(k)). identified in the consent decree that are EPA received on the analyses, are generated by the paint production further discussed in this notice in D. Does This Final Determination industry through the use of risk section IV below. We considered the Satisfy the Terms of the ED v. Whitman assessments and risk modeling, as well results of the risk analyses, as well as Consent Decree? as consideration of other pertinent comments received, and the results of The 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste information. Today’s final listing analyses conducted in response to Amendments (HSWA) to RCRA require determination follows the elements of information provided by public EPA to make listing determinations for our listing decision policy that was commenters in finalizing our listing paint production wastes (see RCRA presented in the proposed listing determinations for each wastestream. section 3001(e)(2)). In 1989, the determination for wastes generated by The risk analyses conducted in support Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the dye and pigment industries of our proposed listing determination which recently changed its name to published in the Federal Register on are presented in detail in the Risk Environmental Defense (ED), filed a December 22, 1994 (see 59 FR at 66073). Assessment Technical Background lawsuit to enforce the statutory This policy uses a ‘‘weight-of-evidence’’ Document for the Paint and Coatings deadlines for listing decisions in RCRA approach in which calculated risk Hazardous Waste Listing Determination. section 3001(e)(2). (ED vs. Whitman, information is a key factor in making a Additional information and analyses D.D.C. Civ. No. 89–0598). To resolve listing determination. conducted in response to comments most of the issues in the case, ED and Under 40 CFR 261.11(a)(3), there are received on our proposed rule are EPA entered into a consent decree, eleven factors for determining whether included in the Addendum to the Risk which has been amended several times a waste is capable of posing a Assessment Technical Background to revise deadlines for EPA action. ‘‘substantial present or potential hazard Document for the Paint and Coatings Paragraph 1.d (as amended) of the to human health or the environment.’’ Hazardous Waste Listing Determination. consent decree addresses the paint Nine of these factors, as described This document is located in the docket production industry: generally below, are directly for today’s final determination. incorporated into EPA’s completion of a EPA shall promulgate a final listing A. Waste Liquids From Paint determination for paint production wastes on risk assessment for the wastestreams of 1 Manufacturing or before March 30, 2002. This listing concern: • determination shall be proposed for public Toxicity (§ 261.11(a)(3)(i)) is We are making a final determination comment on or before January 28, 2001. This considered in developing the health not to list waste liquids from paint listing determination shall include the benchmarks used in the risk assessment manufacturing, because we now believe following wastes: solvent cleaning wastes modeling. that the management scenario we used (K078), water/caustic cleaning wastes (K079), • Constituent concentrations and as the basis for the proposed listing, an wastewater treatment sludge (K081), and waste quantities (§§ 261.11(a)(3)(ii) and emission control dust or sludge (K082) for off-site unlined surface impoundment, which listings were suspended on January 261.11(a)(3)(viii)) are used to define the is not plausible. Information we initial conditions for the risk evaluation. 16, 1981 (46 FR 4614), and off-specification • received in comments indicates that production wastes. Potential to migrate, persistence, management in any surface degradation, and bioaccumulation of the Today’s final determination satisfies impoundment is a rare occurrence (we hazardous constituents and any EPA’s duty under paragraph 1.d to found only one case), and we have no degradation products promulgate listing determinations for indication that such units are unlined. (§§ 261.11(a)(3)(iii), 261.11(a)(3)(iv), the specified paint production wastes. Furthermore, we also found an error in 261.11(a)(3)(v), and 261.11(a)(3)(vi)) are Moreover, compliance with the consent our modeling equations that all considered in the design of the fate decree fulfills EPA’s duty to make overestimated risks for most and transport models used to determine listing determinations for the paint constituents of concern (discussed in the concentrations of the contaminants production industry under section detail in section IV.B.1). This factor, as to which individuals are exposed. 3001(e)(2) of RCRA. • well as the infrequent occurrence of Plausible mismanagement and other other key constituents in the waste, II. Summary of Today’s Action regulatory actions (§§ 261.11 (a)(3)(vii) further supports our decision not to list In today’s notice, we are finalizing a this waste. Finally, we believe that 1 The remaining two factors, damage cases as determination not to add paint result of mismanagement and other factors existing and upcoming regulations production wastes to the list of (§§ 261.11(a)(3)(ix) and 261.11(a)(3)(xi)) are under RCRA and the Clean Air Act hazardous wastes in 40 CFR 261.32. considered, as appropriate. (CAA) will limit the levels of most
VerDate 11
organic chemicals of concern in paint Under the Land Disposal Restrictions RCRA section 3001(e)(2) and the ED v. wastes. program, we proposed to: establish Whitman (D.D.C. Civ. No. 89–598) treatment standards for each of the two consent decree. The proposed rule B. Waste Solids From Paint candidate listings; add styrene to the applied to paint and coatings Manufacturing Universal Treatment Standards (UTS) manufacturers.2 It did not apply to We also are making a final Table in 268.48; add styrene and miscellaneous allied products3 or artist determination not to list waste solids acrylamide to the F039 treatment paint. from paint manufacturing. Correcting an standards applicable to hazardous waste The consent decree required the error in modeling (discussed above and landfill leachate; and designate styrene Agency to make hazardous waste listing in detail in section IV.B.1) causes some as an underlying hazardous constituent. determinations on five types of paint constituents to drop from further We also proposed to designate K179 production wastes. These wastes are: consideration. In addition, after and K180 as hazardous substances (1) Solvent cleaning wastes as waste considering information we received in subject to the release reporting liquids and solids generated from equipment comments, as well as information we requirements under the Comprehensive and tank cleaning operations; collected from the survey and Environmental Response, (2) water and/or caustic cleaning wastes as waste liquids and solids generated from elsewhere, we do not now believe the Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and to adjust their one pound equipment and tank cleaning operations; concentrations of the remaining (3) wastewater treatment sludge as waste constituents of concern in paint wastes statutory reportable quantities (RQs). We proposed that all generators could solids generated in on-site or captive would approach the listing levels. While wastewater treatment processes solely or use knowledge of the waste to make an one of the constituents (antimony) has primarily for treating paint production waste initial determination as to whether any liquids; some uses in paint formulations, we do of the regulated constituents are present not believe we have a reasonable basis (4) emission control dust or sludge as in the waste. If you determined that waste solids collected in a facility’s to list this waste for this constituent. In none of the constituents were present, particulate emission control devices such as particular, we did not find any surveyed your wastes would not be considered baghouses; facility that generated wastes with K179 or K180 and you would have no (5) off-specification production wastes as antimony concentrations at or above the further obligation for making a listing waste solids. listing level. Furthermore, we believe determination. However, the wastes We stated that the proposed listing any paint waste solids with high would have remained subject to a would not apply to off-specification antimony levels would be generated determination on whether or not they paint that a downstream entity decides infrequently and not pose significant exhibit any of the hazardous waste to discard or send back to the risks. characteristics (see 40 CFR 261.21 manufacturer. However, once the III. Summary of Proposed Rule through 261.24). If there was a manufacturer determined that unused possibility that the constituents of product was destined for disposal, that A. What Regulations Did EPA Propose? concern might be present, we proposed off-specification product would be subject to the listing. In the February 13, 2001 proposed a two tiered approach for determining rule (66 FR 10060), we proposed two whether the wastes were hazardous at C. What Risk Assessment Approach Was hazardous waste listings, K179 for paint the point of generation. If your total Used for the Proposed Rule? projected annual generation of paint manufacturing waste solids and K180 We conducted human health risk for waste liquids. We proposed a manufacturing waste solids was more than 40 metric tons, and/or more than analyses and a screening level concentration-based listing, such that ecological risk assessment to support only wastes that met or exceeded certain 100 metric tons of waste liquids, you would need to test your wastes annually our proposed concentration-based listing levels for constituents of concern listing determinations. The human would have to be managed as hazardous to determine whether constituent concentrations were below the listing health risk assessments that we under RCRA. We proposed that if you conducted to support the listing generate any of the identified paint levels. If your projected annual waste volumes were below these levels, you determination included four primary manufacturing wastes (from tank and tasks: (1) Selecting constituents of equipment cleaning operations that use could use knowledge of the waste or testing to determine whether the wastes potential concern in waste, (2) solvents, water, and/or caustic; emission evaluating plausible waste management control dusts; wastewater treatment were hazardous. Alternatively you could assume your wastes were scenarios, (3) calculating exposure sludges; or off-specification product, as concentrations by modeling the release specified in each proposed listing hazardous. If your wastes met the listing and transport of the constituents from description), you would need to description, they would have been the waste management unit to the point determine whether your waste contains subject to all applicable RCRA subtitle of exposure, and (4) calculating waste any of the constituents of concern C hazardous waste requirements, concentrations that are unlikely to pose identified for each listing at a including the LDR requirements. You unacceptable risk. concentration equal to or greater than can find more detailed discussions of In choosing potential constituents of the concentration level set for that the proposal in the preamble to the concern, we identified commonly used, constituent. proposed rule and in the Background As part of the K179 and K180 listing Documents we have placed in the 2 Including, but not limited to, entities who process, EPA also proposed to amend manufacture: paints (including undercoats, primers, rulemaking docket. finishes, sealers, enamels, refinish paints, and Appendix VIII of 40 CFR part 261 to add B. What Paint Manufacturing Wastes tinting bases), stains, varnishes (including n-butyl alcohol, ethyl benzene, methyl lacquers), product finishes for original equipment isobutyl ketone, styrene, and xylenes to Are Within the Scope of the Consent manufacturing and industrial application, and the list of hazardous constituents. We Decree for This Listing Determination? coatings (including special purpose coatings and powder coatings). also proposed to add the constituents EPA based its decisions regarding the 3 Not included were paint and varnish removers, that served as the basis for the proposed scope of the industries and wastes thinners for lacquers and other solvent-based paint listings to Appendix VII. covered by the proposed listing on products, pigment dispersions or putty.
VerDate 11
potentially hazardous constituents that modeling and indirect exposure D. Which Wastes Did EPA Propose To could pose unacceptable risk if present modeling to determine what the List as Hazardous? in mismanaged paint manufacturing concentrations will be in the media with 1. Waste Solids From Paint wastes. In addition, we selected which a human receptor comes into Manufacturing That Meet Certain constituents for which SW–846 test contact. There are a number of Constituent Concentration Levels (K179) methods were available and for which computer-based models and equations We proposed to list as hazardous we had access to toxicity, fate, and that we used to predict these those waste solids from paint transport data with which to conduct a concentrations. risk assessment (see 66 FR 10084). manufacturing that meet certain Establishing plausible exposure As part of the characterization of the constituent concentration levels for the scenarios depended on the way a risk levels from human exposures to the following constituents: acrylamide, particular waste was being or could be constituents of concern, toxicity acrylonitrile, antimony, methyl isobutyl managed. We reviewed current waste information on each constituent of ketone, and methyl methacrylate. This handling practices reported in the RCRA concern was integrated with the results proposed listing included waste solids 3007 survey and based on that chose to of the exposure assessment. Chronic generated by paint manufacturing model four waste management human health benchmarks were used in facilities from tank and equipment scenarios: (1) Waste solids disposed in this assessment to evaluate potential cleaning operations that use solvents, industrial nonhazardous waste landfills; noncancer and cancer risks. water, and/or caustic; emission control (2) waste liquids stored and treated in dusts; wastewater treatment sludges; or The calculated concentration levels off-site tanks at centralized wastewater off-specification product. treatment facilities (CWTs) prior to we proposed represent the probabilistic We also proposed to use the listing discharge to a POTW or under an results at the 90th percentile risk level concentrations as ‘‘exit’’ levels for NPDES permit; (3) waste liquids based on individuals living closest to residues from paint manufacturing disposed in surface impoundments at the waste management unit. In other waste solids (K179). The use of the CWTs; and (4) waste liquids stored and words, for 90% of the receptor scenarios listing concentrations as exit levels treated in tanks on-site at paint we evaluated, the concentration levels would terminate the applicability of the manufacturing facilities prior to are lower than our chosen target cancer derived-from rule and, therefore, the discharge to a POTW or under an risk level of 1E–05 (one chance in treatment residues would no longer be NPDES permit. 100,000) excess lifetime cancer risk for considered a listed hazardous waste. We used information on the national individuals exposed to carcinogens in 2. Waste Liquids From Paint distributions of waste management unit the waste streams or, for Manufacturing That Meet Certain characteristics (e.g., size and waste noncarcinogens, the target hazard Constituent Concentration Levels, capacity) collected in surveys quotient (HQ) of 1.0. Unless Managed Under Certain conducted for other rulemakings to Conditions (K180) establish the characteristics of the off- In general, we relied on the risk site waste management units. On the assessment results to guide us in We proposed to list waste liquids other hand, we used information from deciding which constituents would be from paint manufacturing that meet the RCRA 3007 survey on the nature of most useful for defining which paint certain constituent concentration levels on-site management units and on the manufacturing wastes should for the following constituents: quantities of waste solids and liquids potentially be listed hazardous wastes. acrylamide, acrylonitrile, antimony, sent by each facility to the four We dropped constituents from further ethylbenzene, formaldehyde, methyl management practices of concern. examination if the risk-based isobutyl ketone, methyl methacrylate, We determined that there are several concentration levels for the waste methylene chloride, n-butyl alcohol, pathways for releases from the exceeded or approached 100% of the styrene, toluene, and xylene (mixed management units. Each of the four waste mass because such conditions isomers). This proposed listing included waste management units can release were unlikely to exist in the wastes we waste liquids generated by paint vapor emissions to the air. Landfills can examined. We also chose not to include manufacturing facilities from tank and also release particulate emissions to the constituents that are already sufficiently equipment cleaning operations that use air from solids disposed of in landfills. regulated by the Toxicity Characteristic. solvents, water, and/or caustic. Releases can also occur through We proposed this listing as a leaching of waste into the subsurface The preamble to the proposed rule contingent-based listing. That is, if your from landfills and surface provides a detailed discussion of EPA’s waste liquids are managed exclusively impoundments. We assumed that tanks risk assessment for the paint in tanks or containers prior to discharge were sufficiently impermeable that they manufacturing listing determination to a POTW or under an NPDES permit, were highly unlikely to release volumes (see 66 FR 10083). A full description of your waste would not be subject to the of waste to the subsurface sufficient to all risk analyses conducted in support of proposed listing and you would not pose an unacceptable groundwater risk. our listing determinations finalized in need to make a hazardous waste Human receptors may be exposed to today’s decision can be found in the risk determination for those wastes. We releases through a variety of routes, both assessment background documents proposed this approach because we direct and indirect. Direct routes available in the docket. (See Risk believe wastes managed in this manner include consumption of affected Assessment Technical Background do not pose sufficient risk to warrant groundwater and inhalation of ambient Document for the Paint and Coatings hazardous waste regulation. air or air in the home contaminated by Hazardous Waste Listing Determination Due to the uncertainties in our releases from use of affected and Addendum to the Risk Assessment assessment of the management of paint groundwater. Indirect paths include Technical Background Document for the manufacturing liquids in surface consumption of contaminated food Paint and Coatings Hazardous Waste impoundments, we also proposed an products such as vegetables, beef and Listing Determination.) alternative option not to list waste dairy products, and fish. We conducted liquids from paint manufacturing. contaminant fate and transport Further details of the proposed listings
VerDate 11
and the various options are contained in proposal, we contacted nine of the 24 impoundments are used for this waste.6 the proposed rule (66 FR 10108). off-site centralized wastewater treatment Therefore, we concur that the (CWT) facilities that were reported in management scenario we modeled, an IV. What Is the Rationale for Today’s unlined surface impoundment, does not Final Determination? the RCRA 3007 survey to receive liquid wastes from paint manufacturers. We appear plausible, because the factual A. What Is the Basis for EPA’s Final found only one facility and it used lined record does not support a finding that Determination Not To List Paint surface impoundments. We extrapolated this management scenario is either Production Waste Liquids? this finding to suggest that there may be currently in use or is likely to be used We have decided not to list as other facilities with surface in the future (for further discussion of hazardous waste liquids generated by impoundments, and that perhaps as EPA’s concept of plausible management paint manufacturing facilities. We many as 4 or 5 CWT facilities that see the proposed rule for solvent wastes proposed a hazardous waste listing, receive paint wastes may use surface at 61 FR 42323, August 14, 1996, and K180, for paint manufacturing waste impoundments of some kind.4 One also the final determination for solvents liquids that contain any of the twelve commenter contacted the remaining at 63 FR 64384, November 19, 1998). As noted in the proposed rule, we constituents of concern at or above the active CWT facilities (three were no also believe that the level of protection designated listing levels. In the longer in business) that were reported to afforded by a liner system could be proposed rule, we based our listing receive paint manufacturing waste and significant for a surface impoundment, levels on modeling we performed for a found that none of the remaining which will contain liquid wastes only surface impoundment scenario. We facilities used surface impoundments. during its operating life (66 FR 10108). found potential risks of concern from The commenter argued that, based on A lined impoundment with a finite the management of liquid wastes in an EPA’s own statistics, there would only operational life (30 to 50 years) is less off-site centralized wastewater treatment be at most one other unidentified likely to release liquids; releases to the system with an unlined surface surface impoundment in addition to the subsurface would be reduced due the impoundment; thus, we proposed the identified lined surface impoundment liner and leachate collection system in K180 listing. However, we noted in the managing waste liquids from paint place. If, however, leaks occurred in the proposal (66 FR 10108) that we were manufacturing. The commenter liners of such an impoundment during also considering not listing this waste concluded that a surface impoundment, its operating life, the unit can be due to the uncertainties with the particularly an unlined surface drained and repaired before continued management practice that we modeled impoundment, is not a plausible use. Therefore, we do not believe the in our risk assessment. We received management scenario, and that using risk analysis presented in the proposal numerous comments disputing the this speculative scenario overestimates for unlined impoundments can be plausibility of this scenario and potential risks from the disposal of paint applied to lined impoundments. For questioning other assumptions we used manufacturing waste liquids. this reason, we are not listing the liquid in modeling. Furthermore, as noted in paint wastes. We believe that our the discussion of risk assessment issues After reviewing the information in the decision is further supported by the in section IV.B, we found an error in the comments and reconsidering the considerations presented in the model that overestimated risks for eight available information, we agree with the following sections. of the 12 constituents. Below we commenters that the use of surface summarize the critical comments we impoundments for treatment of paint 2. Estimates of Surface Impoundment received and present our rationale for manufacturing waste liquids appears to Risks Were Likely Overstated be even less frequent than we estimated not listing waste liquids from paint In the proposed rule, we also manufacturing. at the proposal. Our data for the surveyed facilities show that one off-site discussed the likelihood that EPA’s groundwater modeling scenarios 1. Management Scenario CWT facility used surface contain impoundments with impoundments to treat paint The Agency received eight comments characteristics that are unlikely for large manufacturing wastes, and probably no from industry and industry associations off-site treatment facilities, i.e., small more than two such facilities are likely stating that disposal in unlined surface units with low flow rates and long to exist nationwide that accept liquid impoundments is not a plausible waste retention times (66 FR 10108). This is wastes from paint manufacturers.5 The management scenario. For example, one because the database we used for one facility that we found to use commenter noted that the listing impoundment parameters contained impoundments has only lined proposal for liquid paint production data for on-site units, which may not be impoundments, and we have no wastes is driven by potential risks representative of off-site commercial arising from unlined surface indication that off-site unlined CWT facilities. This means that many of impoundments. However, EPA the small impoundments used in the identified only one case where a surface 4 The commenter suggested that the number of probabilistic modeling contained a high possible impoundments estimated by EPA’s impoundment was used to manage these fraction of paint wastes. We suggested wastes. The commenter stated that this contractor was 2–4, not the 4–5 EPA described in the proposal. However, we note that the estimate of that this may not be representative of limited waste management practice does 2–4 was for the sampled facilities, and that the actual off-site commercial treatment not support a nationwide listing. In estimates of 4 and 5 were derived for the larger units, which are likely to be larger, and number of relevant paint manufacturers in the addition, the commenter argued that that paint wastes would make up a EPA should not rely on a management database of interest (see the memo from Paul Denault, Dynamac Corp., to Dave Carver of EPA, smaller fraction of wastewaters in such scenario as the basis for a hazardous October 4, 2000). units. One commenter contacted the waste listing unless it establishes a 5 See Table 4 in the memo from Paul Denault, CWT facility that reported a surface ‘‘rational relationship’’ between the Dynamac Corp., to Dave Carver of EPA, October 4, impoundment and found that wastes and the management scenario. 2000. Knowing the ‘‘true’’ value for the number of impoundments for the facilities in the survey to be When researching possible risks from one, the number of impoundments for the total 6 The 3007 Survey data also did not show any the management of liquid paint wastes population of facilities of interest was estimated to facilities using on-site surface impoundments for in surface impoundments for the be two. paint manufacturing wastes.
VerDate 11
approximately 3% of all the liquid alcohol was 41,000 ppm. Thus, factoring National Volatile Organic Compound wastes accepted for surface in a dilution of at least 12.5 during wash Emissions Standards for Architectural impoundment treatment in 1998 came out, the concentrations for these Coatings and Industrial Maintenance from the paint manufacturing industry. constituents in paint product also Coatings (AIM) rule. They stated that The commenter argued that if EPA used would approach unrealistic levels. regulations severely limiting the use of a more accurate estimate of the fraction When we factor in the likely volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in of paint manufacturing wastes managed overestimate of risk noted in the above paint products would greatly reduce in surface impoundments (e.g., 3%), section due to the waste fraction VOCs in paint production waste as well. then this would significantly reduce or assumptions we used in the proposal, One commenter further indicated that, eliminate risks in EPA’s assessment. the listing levels would be another order because our survey collected 1998 data, After considering all the available of magnitude higher. it does not take into account the changes information, we agree that the The two remaining constituents that that have or will be made in paint assumptions for the unit characteristics would not be affected by the modeling formulation to meet the AIM Rule that we used for modeling likely error are acrylamide and antimony. As regulatory levels.8 This would include resulted in an overestimate of possible discussed in the later section on paint changes required by many states in risks from a surface impoundment. As waste solids, we now believe that these ozone non-attainment areas, which have noted in the proposal, the database of two constituents are not likely to be developed even more stringent VOC impoundments we used in modeling present in paint wastes at the proposed regulations than the National AIM Rule. yielded a 90th percentile value of one listing levels, or to be present so Commenters pointed out that there for the fraction of paint manufacturing infrequently that they would not cause are currently 14 major federal National waste in impoundments, i.e., 100% of a substantial hazard to human health Emission Standards for Hazardous Air the liquid waste was assumed to be from and the environment. In reaching this Pollutants (NESHAP) surface coatings paint manufacturing. While we did not conclusion, we reviewed the 3007 categories with Maximum Achievable attempt to quantify the effect of survey further to assess the potential for Control Technology (MACT) standards changing the waste fraction through liquid wastes to contain these that have been (or shortly will be) modeling, we believe that using the constituents and be disposed of in issued for a wide variety of industries. much smaller waste fraction reported impoundments of any sort. In the 3007 The commenters said that these for the one known impoundment (3%) survey, facilities reported the presence ‘‘Surface Coating MACTs’’ will force would reduce risks by over an order of of acrylamide polymers in only two coating application facilities to use magnitude. Thus, this is an additional nonhazardous wash waters, and these coatings with low levels of Hazardous factor that would make any significant were sent to POTWs, not off-site CWT Air Pollutants (HAPs) to avoid installing risks from an impoundment scenario facilities. Facilities reported antimony expensive control technologies. The unlikely. in only four nonhazardous wash waters commenters argued that many and the reported levels were ‘‘trace’’ or 3. Impact of Modeling Error customers will demand the production well below the proposed listing level; of low-HAP coatings, because most We also uncovered an error in our three of the facilities sent their MACTs will require at least a 90–95% modeling due to the assumptions we wastewaters to POTWs, while the other reduction in surface coating HAP used to account for risks arising from facility reported sending the treated emissions. Noting that nearly all the residential use of groundwater (e.g., wash water to a CWT facility. We proposed waste constituents of concern showering). As we discuss in detail in contacted this generating facility and section IV.B.1 below, correcting this in the proposed rule are HAPs, the found it used a very small quantity of commenters suggested that eliminating error would significantly raise the antimony-containing pigment in the listing levels for 8 of the 12 organic most of the HAPs in paint products will manufacture of only a few paint batches eliminate most HAPs in paint constituents (by about a factor of 50) per year. (This facility reported a single that we proposed for liquid paint production waste. Finally, commenters ingredient containing antimony out of stated that the planned MACT covering manufacturing wastes. When we hundreds of ingredients used in paint consider the likely dilution that occurs paint manufacturers (Miscellaneous production.) Organic Chemical and Coatings for paint washed out during the Considering the impact of using the Manufacturing, due to be published) cleaning of mixing tanks (estimated to much smaller waste fraction reported will similarly reduce HAPs in paint be about a factor of 12.5 in the proposed for the one known impoundment, and formulations, and consequently rule, see 66 FR 10107), the levels of after correcting for the model error (as production wastes. these chemicals in paints would well as considering the infrequent approach or exceed 100% to generate In general, we agree that the existing occurrence of significant levels for key and upcoming regulations on air wastewater concentrations at the constituents), the constituent increased listing levels.7 Similarly, two releases will limit the levels of many concentrations in liquid paint wastes organic chemicals of concern in paint of the four remaining chemicals already are not likely to approach the corrected had levels that were high, i.e., the wastes. As we noted in the proposal (66 listing levels for an impoundment FR 10103), regulations that limit air proposed level for formaldehyde was scenario, even if an impoundment 81,000 ppm and the level for n-butyl releases from off-site CWT facilities are scenario was a plausible also likely to keep the levels of organic mismanagement scenario. 7 The listing level for acrylonitrile would increase constituents low, including in by a somewhat smaller factor due to the correction 4. Other Regulatory Programs impoundments that might exist. See (i.e., by about a factor of 7, analogous to the increase We received comments stating that subpart DD in 40 CFR part 63 sets found for waste solids) because its carcinogenic risk NESHAPs for off-site waste and level becomes the critical endpoint after the EPA did not consider the full effect of correction. Thus, a listing level of about 65 ppm existing or upcoming rules under the recovery operations, which may include would result. Considering a dilution factor of 12.5 Clean Air Act (CAA) that would limit from washing out of a mixing tank, this would 8 The final rule entitled National Volatile Organic reqire a acrylonitrile level of over 800 ppm in the the potential risks from paint Compound Emission Standards for Architectural paint itself. For reasons noted in the discussion on production wastes. Commenters cited Coatings (40 CFR part 59, subpart D) was published waste solids, such levels in paint appear unlikely. several regulations, including the September 11, 1998 (FR 63 48848).
VerDate 11
off-site centralized wastewater treatment believe that the unit characteristics we detail in section IV.B.1). In addition, we facilities. The impacts of this and the used for modeling impoundments likely received numerous comments objecting other regulations cited on paint wastes resulted in an overestimation of possible to the proposed listing based on issues are difficult to quantify. However, such risks. After correcting for a modeling related to: (1) Our interpretation and standards provide incentives to reduce error and considering the infrequent aggregation of the 3007 survey data on HAPs through source reduction or occurrence of key constituents, any waste volumes and management pretreatment to avoid costly engineering remaining risks do not support a practices and whether they resulted in controls. Therefore, the impact of these decision to list this waste, even if an an overestimation of waste volumes that other existing and potential regulatory unlined impoundment was plausible. were used as inputs to the risk controls contribute to our belief that Finally, we considered the impact of assessment; (2) the statistical design and listing of this waste is not warranted. other regulatory programs on the analysis of the 3007 survey and whether Finally, a significant fraction of paint potential management scenarios and the it resulted in unrealistically large waste manufacturing wastes is already RCRA associated risks (factor (x)). We find that volume estimates; and (3) the potential hazardous waste, primarily due to the the existing and upcoming regulations for constituents of concern to be present regulations for characteristic hazardous under the Clean Air Act (CAA) will in the waste. waste under 40 CFR 261.21 through limit the levels of many organic We discuss the correction to the 261.24. From our survey of the industry, chemicals of concern in paint wastes. showering model and the key issues we found that about 36% of the liquid We also find that a significant portion commenters raised which influenced wastes were coded and managed as of paint production waste liquid is our final determination in the following characteristic or listed hazardous waste. already managed as hazardous waste sections. These issues are discussed in The characteristic liquid wastes under RCRA. Therefore, after the order that we addressed them in our typically exhibited the characteristic of considering all these factors we decision making. First, we corrected an ignitability or toxicity, and the listed conclude that a listing of paint error in the shower model that liquid wastes usually were classified as production waste liquids is not significantly overestimated inhalation solvent wastes (F001 through F005). We warranted. exposures to noncarcinogens. As a believe the existing RCRA regulations result, two of the five potential B. What Is the Basis for EPA’s Final provide controls for those liquid paint constituents of concern were dropped Determination Not To List Paint wastes that are most likely to contain from further consideration because their Production Waste Solids? many of the constituents of concern, i.e., calculated listing concentration levels those with high solvent or organic We have decided not to list as indicated they would not pose a risk. content. hazardous waste solids generated by Second, we considered the public paint manufacturing facilities. We comments on our statistical analysis and 5. Conclusion for Paint Production proposed a hazardous waste listing, use of the 3007 survey data to derive Waste Liquids K179, for paint manufacturing waste waste volumes that were key inputs to We are making a final determination solids generated by paint manufacturing the risk assessment. As a result, we not to list waste liquids from paint facilities that, at the point of generation, made some adjustments to our statistical manufacturing. As noted in Section II of contain any of the five constituents of analysis and derived adjusted waste today’s notice, we applied the factors concern at or above the levels listed in volumes that we used to re-run the risk under § 261.11(a)(3) in making this Table IV.B–1 below. We tentatively assessment. Finally, we considered the listing determination. A key found potential risks of concern from likelihood that constituents of concern consideration is what constitutes a the management of waste solids in an would actually be present in the waste plausible management scenario for this off-site Subtitle D industrial landfill. at concentrations that would pose an waste (factor (vii) under § 261.11(a)(3)). The paint manufacturing waste solids in unreasonable risk to human health or After reviewing the comments and the proposed listing were: (1) Waste the environment. We respond to public considering all the available solids generated from tank and comments in the Paint Manufacturing information, we believe that the equipment cleaning operations that use Hazardous Waste Listing determination: management scenario we modeled, an solvents, water and/or caustic; (2) Response to Comments Document unlined surface impoundment, is not emission control dusts or sludges; (3) (available in the docket for today’s final plausible. We find that management of wastewater treatment sludges; and (4) determination). liquid paint wastes in surface off-specification product. impoundments appears to be rare, and 1. Changes to the Risk Assessment we have no indication that such units TABLE IV.B–1.—PROPOSED LISTING We modified the exposure component are unlined. Therefore, we are not CONCENTRATION LEVELS FOR of the shower model for non- listing paint production waste liquids. WASTE SOLIDS (K179) carcinogens to correct an error that we This decision is supported by discovered in the risk analysis. The additional considerations. We Concentra- changes to the risk analysis for waste considered most of the other factors Constituent tion levels solids (described in the next paragraph) under § 261.11(a)(3) as part of our risk (mg/kg) resulted in risk estimates which assessment methodology (factors (i) indicated that two of the five Acrylamide ...... 310 through (viii), including constituent Acrylonitrile ...... 43 constituents (methyl isobutyl ketone toxicity, constituent concentration, Antimony ...... 2,300 and methyl methacrylate) were no constituent fate and transport, waste Methyl Isobutyl Ketone ...... 73,000 longer of concern. volumes).9 In this regard, we now Methyl methacrylate ...... 28,000 For the risk assessment in the proposed listing determination, we 9 Note that we also considered whether any After the comment period closed, we assumed that contaminants may be damage cases arising from the mismanagement of discovered an error in the calculation of transported in groundwater to domestic paint manufacturing wastes (factor (ix)). We human exposures from showering in the determined that the available data did not provide groundwater wells where the useful information for a listing determination (see groundwater model that resulted in over groundwater is extracted and used for 66 FR 10082–10083). estimating exposure levels (discussed in showering in addition to drinking water.
VerDate 11
We assumed that an adult resident exposure that is likely to be without carcinogenic constituents (except inhales vapors that are emitted from the appreciable risk or deleterious effects antimony) we considered for the K179 water used for showering. Exposure over a lifetime). waste solids listing proposal. The while showering was the driving The result of this direct comparison results are the total concentration in mg/ pathway of exposure for several was that the human health hazard from kg for both the combined solid and constituents in the proposed listing. non-carcinogens was based on an emission control dust waste streams This exposure pathway is modeled with individual’s exposure to air when managed in landfills. The a set of equations (hereafter referred to concentrations in the shower for 24 ‘‘corrected’’ concentrations are what the as the ‘‘Shower Model’’) that estimate hours a day, every day. The air concentrations would have been if there the concentration of the constituent in concentrations in the shower for the had not been an error in the shower non-carcinogens should have been the air after it has volatilized from the model. The corrected concentrations adjusted to account for the time the water during showering. Based on a were calculated using the original waste receptor is not showering. The non- review of the model, we determined that volume weights; thus, the only change cancer exposure component of the the air concentration estimated in the shower model has been modified to in the risk assessment that is reflected shower was not adjusted for an average correct this error. For carcinogens, the in the table below is the correction of inhalation exposure during a 24-hour exposure equations used in the proposal the shower model. The reason the day. Rather, it was incorrectly compared do account for the length of time spent acrylonitrile level did not increase as directly to the noncancer inhalation in the shower so that the calculations much as the others is due to the fact that benchmarks, also known as reference for carcinogens were correct as the concentration level proposed was concentrations (RfCs), in order to proposed. Therefore, the listing levels based on noncarcinogenic effects of calculate a hazard quotient. The RfC is for acrylamide were not affected by this acrylonitrile, whereas the corrected a chronic health benchmark and reflects change in the shower model. For level is based on carcinogenic effects. a concentration in air to which an antimony, the results do not change That is, when the shower model individual can be continuously exposed because antimony is not volatile and correction was made, the concentration without experiencing any adverse does not have an inhalation risk level based on noncarcinogenic effects health effects. A hazard quotient is the component from showering. increased to the point where ratio of an individual’s chronic daily Table IV.B–2 contains both the carcinogenic effects are now considered dose of a noncarcinogen to a reference proposed and the corrected risk-based to pose a greater risk and, therefore, are concentration (an estimate of daily concentration levels for the non- the basis for the corrected numbers.
TABLE IV.B–2.—RISK-BASED CONCENTRATION LEVELS FOR CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN IN PAINT MANUFACTURING WASTES WHICH ARE AFFECTED BY RISK FROM INHALATION WHILE SHOWERING 1
Combined waste solids Emission control dust waste Constituent Proposal con- Corrected con- Proposal con- Corrected con- centration centration centration centration level (mg/kg) level (mg/kg) level (mg/kg) level (mg/kg)
acrylonitrile ...... 60 440 43 310 methyl isobutyl ketone ...... 120,000 E 73,000 E methyl methacrylate ...... 41,000 E 28,000 E 1 These levels are the concentrations in paint manufacturing waste that would potentially present unacceptable risk if met or exceeded. The ‘‘corrected values’’ shown in this table are calculated with the original facility weights used in the proposed listing. E = risk-based waste concentration exceeds 1 million parts per million; therefore, these constituents were eliminated from the listing based on this finding.
2. RCRA Section 3007 Survey of Paint risk modeling parameters such as waste were then randomly chosen from each Manufacturers types and amounts sent to specific category. Our primary source of data for this management practices; and (4) to assess Each surveyed facility was assigned a regulatory determination is a survey of land disposal restrictions treatment weight representing the total number of paint manufacturers conducted under capacity and potential economic impact facilities in the category and how likely authority of RCRA section 3007. The on the entire universe of paint it was for any facility to be sampled purpose of the survey was to gather manufacturers. from that category. For example, if a information about nonhazardous and The survey was a stratified random category had ten facilities and two hazardous waste generation and sample of 299 facilities identified as facilities were sampled, the weight management practices in the U.S. paint paint manufacturers in the Dun & assigned to each facility in the category and coatings manufacturing industry. Bradstreet data base. We stratified the would be five. We used these weights to As explained in the proposal, we used sample to improve our coverage for extrapolate from the surveyed facilities data from the 3007 survey of paint various industry subsets that were most to the sampling population so that we manufacturers for several purposes: (1) likely to generate large waste volumes could estimate the various waste To provide a general assessment of the and to identify the vast majority of streams and waste amounts that were paint and coating industry’s waste waste management practices. The generated by the population of paint generation and management practices; stratification divided the sampling manufacturing facilities, as well as the (2) to identify plausible waste universe into categories based on frequency of waste management management scenarios that are the basis facility size, type of paint manufactured practices. Again, as an example, if a for our risk assessment and listing and Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) facility with a weight of five reported determination; (3) to provide data for reporting status. Surveyed facilities generating 100 tons of emission control
VerDate 11
dust that were disposed of in a Also, industrial nonhazardous landfills in calculating their waste volumes. nonhazardous waste landfill, we are assumed not to have daily cover. Therefore, we did not overestimate the counted that as five facilities, each Both of these add to the conservatism of volume of these waste streams. generating 100 tons of emission control the protective constituent levels The same commenter also argued that dust disposed of in a nonhazardous predicted by the risk assessment. combining waste volumes for the four waste landfill. For risk modeling Disposal in a Subtitle D industrial solid waste streams in the risk purposes, 100 tons of emission control landfill is a plausible management assessment artificially and arbitrarily dust was entered into the waste volume scenario because approximately half of inflated the risks associated with the distribution five times. We did not the facilities that directly land dispose wastes. Rather, they stated that EPA analyze the total quantity of their wastes send them to Subtitle D should have modeled the volumes for nonhazardous waste solids from all industrial landfills. The commenter did each waste stream separately. The paint manufacturers going into a single not provide any information to support commenter contended that landfill because this scenario never modeling municipal landfills, as an manufacturing sites would handle each occurs. When individual surveyed alternative. Therefore, we continue to waste stream separately and likely facilities reported sending multiple believe that modeling industrial dispose of them separately. Further, the waste streams to a single landfill or landfills is an acceptable approach. commenter claims that we did not meet when more than one facility reported The same trade association also raised our obligation with regard to the scope sending solid waste streams to the same several issues concerning our of the listing determination by landfill (based on name and address interpretation and aggregation of waste combining the solid waste streams, provided by survey respondents), we volumes and our interpretation of waste rather than assessing the risks of each added those waste volumes to ensure management information provided by separately. We disagree with this that we accurately reflect the combined survey respondents, which they argue contention. We combined in one risk quantities of paint waste solids that are contributed to overestimating waste assessment only those waste volumes sent to a single management unit. We volumes and risks. (The commenter also for different solid waste streams that also used facility weights to extrapolate raised a number of concerns regarding were reported in the 3007 survey being for total volumes of paint manufacturing the statistical design of the survey and sent to municipal or industrial waste generated by the universe of paint resulting data analysis which are nonhazardous Subtitle D landfills. Each manufacturers. discussed separately in the following waste stream reported separately as section.) The first point the commenter going to a unique facility was 3. Interpretation and Aggregation of raised was that two facilities considered as a separate waste volume Waste Volumes and Management inadvertently reported inaccurate waste in the distribution used in the risk Practices volumes in the survey. Only one of assessment. We only added together For waste solids, we modeled one these involved a solid waste stream; the waste volumes that were actually sent to management scenario, disposal in an facility submitted revised information the same physical location and type of industrial nonhazardous waste landfill. which reduced the amount of waste management unit. The vast majority of waste solids are nonhazardous wastewater treatment In addition, a number of facilities disposed of in municipal or industrial sludge sent to a landfill from 500 to 250 reported that they collect and store nonhazardous Subtitle D landfills, and, tons per year. We have made this different types of waste solids (or waste of these, about half go to industrial correction and used the new waste liquids) in the same containers, as they landfills. We did one risk assessment volume in our revised risk analysis. are generated from a batch production that combined the individual weighted The same commenter claimed that we process, and then dispose of all the waste volumes for all four solid waste incorrectly estimated the waste volumes waste in a single waste management streams that were reported being sent to for one facility that reported two of the unit. Whether managed and transported Subtitle D landfills: tank and equipment largest solid waste streams for emission separately by a paint manufacturer or cleaning sludges, wastewater treatment control dust and off specification combined before transport to a disposal sludges, emission control dust, and off product. In order to convert waste facility, the vast majority of specification product. We did a separate amounts into volumes for input into the nonhazardous waste solids are managed assessment for emission control dust, risk assessment models, we asked 3007 in nonhazardous landfills, including 99 using only the individual weighted survey respondents to provide percent of emission control dust; 97 waste volumes for dusts. The proposed information on the amount of each percent of wastewater treatment sludge; listing description for K179 included all waste stream they generate by weight in 86 percent of wash water sludge and 56 four solid waste streams in one waste metric tons as well as the density of percent of off specification paint. We code. each waste stream. We used the density believe combining waste distributions One trade association objected to our information to convert the weight of from all these solid waste streams is modeling an industrial landfill rather each waste stream into gallons. The appropriate, because it is a more than a municipal landfill. As stated commenter claimed that the two waste accurate representation of the waste above, we chose to model an industrial streams in question are from the management practices reported in the landfill because about half of the wastes production of powder coatings and have survey and of the potential risks. It going to Subtitle D landfills go to a low density of three to four pounds would only be appropriate to model industrial landfills. There are only two per gallon. The commenter argued that each solid waste stream separately if differences in modeling assumptions for we used the wrong waste densities and, each waste stream was being sent to a industrial nonhazardous landfills as therefore, overestimated volumes of distinctive type of waste management compared to municipal landfills. First emission control dust and off practice, or if the waste characteristics industrial landfills are slightly smaller specification paint from this facility. We for individual paint manufacturing solid than municipal landfills so the have reviewed the data supplied by the waste streams are unique. quantities of paint manufacturing waste facility in question and find that they The commenter also argued that we modeled in the industrial landfill are a supplied a density of three pounds per arbitrarily used the risk assessment relatively larger proportion of the total gallon for each of these two waste results from modeling emission control waste quantities going into the unit. streams, which were the densities used dust as the proposed listing
VerDate 11
concentration levels because the is not a high incidence of emission below in section IV.B. 5 as the basis for concentrations were lower. We modeled control dust residual containing organic our final determination not to list paint emission control dust waste volumes materials. The commenter noted that production waste solids as hazardous separately to examine the potential risk only one surveyed facility reported any waste. from air releases from landfills, i.e., we of the proposed organic constituents of In summary, the 3007 survey assumed low moisture content in the concern. That facility inaccurately provided us with a realistic picture of emission control dust wastes and reported methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK) the types of wastes that are generated, assessed risks from wind-blown in their dust. The facility later waste volumes, and management releases. Our modeling showed that submitted revised information to practices being used. Our initial these low moisture wastes did not pose indicate that their dusts do not contain interpretation of the survey data, based any significant risks via air releases; MIBK. As explained above, MIBK was on the information supplied to us by thus both the dust and combined solids eliminated from consideration as a survey respondents, was accurate. results are driven by the groundwater listing constituent after correcting an While the commenter did identify pathway. In the proposal, we suggested error in the shower model. several survey responses that facilities using the listing levels for the dusts However, we continue to believe our changed after the proposal was issued, because the levels were slightly lower. rationale is appropriate for modeling all the commenter did not present any The differences in the proposed of the potential constituents of concern information to support the contention listing levels for dusts and combined in all waste streams for several reasons. that we used the data inappropriately. solids were relatively small (combined First, we note that 32 surveyed facilities For purposes of refining our risk solids levels were higher by about a identified potential constituents of assessment, we changed the amount of factor of 1.5 for the constituents of concern in their nonhazardous emission wastewater treatment sludge for one concern). The slightly lower levels control dusts, including constituents facility from 500 tons to 250 tons, based derived from the dust scenario are a such as cobalt, copper, barium, zinc, on new data the facility provided. In result of the volume distribution for cadmium and chromium in addition to addition, we agree that listing levels for dust waste volumes. This is due to the antimony. This also includes five constituents of concern should be based fact that the individual emission control different facilities reporting a total of on the analysis results for combined dust waste volumes generated from eleven different organic constituents in solids waste volume distributions rather paint manufacturing tended to be larger. their emission control dusts. In than for emission control dust alone. In the combined solids waste volumes, addition, we identified potential Therefore, the discussion below many reported sludge or off- constituents of concern that are widely regarding potential regulatory specification paint waste volumes that used raw materials in paint production, concentration levels for the constituents were quite small. Therefore, even based on the available literature. The of concern is based on levels for the though the total volume of wastes for process for selecting these constituents combined solids. combined solids was higher, the dust is detailed in the proposal (pp. 10083— 4. Statistical Design and Analysis of the volumes yielded somewhat lower listing 10087). Generally, these constituents are RCRA Section 3007 Survey Data for levels. likely to occur in a number of different Estimating Waste Quantities As discussed above, modeling waste streams. We recognize that it is combined waste solids is an accurate possible that a given constituent could One industry trade association raised representation of waste management occur in some solid waste streams and the following key issues concerning the practices reported in the 3007 survey not in others, or at substantially statistical design and analysis of the and the most accurate representation of different concentration levels. However, RCRA section 3007 survey: (1) Whether ground water risks associated with this we did not have information available to use of the Dun and Bradstreet database disposal practice. Therefore, we indicate whether there were some to identify paint manufacturers to conclude that listing levels for waste constituents that would never occur in categorize facilities for the stratified solids would more appropriately be particular waste streams. We believe random sample was appropriate; (2) derived from the combined solids that modeling all constituents of whether mischaracterization of facilities modeling. As noted above, we found concern for all similarly managed waste in the stratified random sample led to that many generators tended to combine streams is a conservative approach to overestimates of waste quantities; and waste solids for disposal and that the identify those that potentially pose (3) whether direct extrapolation from vast majority of waste solids are unacceptable risk. In addition, under a the sampling population to the universe disposed of in nonhazardous landfills. concentration-based listing approach, if of paint manufacturers led to Thus, it is plausible to consider the the constituents do not occur in one overestimates of waste quantities. combined solids as a class of waste for solid waste stream, like emission Following review and consideration potential listing and combined solids control dust, that waste stream could be of these comments, and following the results are more representative of the managed separately as nonhazardous accepted statistical practice of post- waste category we proposed to list. waste, provided the generator meets the survey refinement of the stratification of However, as noted previously, we are applicable implementation surveyed facilities, we adjusted the not finalizing a listing for this category requirements, e.g. certification that the facility stratification approach and because we believe that the risks from waste does not contain the listing adjusted the statistical weighting waste solids do not warrant listing. constituents. procedure to make the sample The same industry trade association This comment raises the broader distribution more representative of the also argued that we should not have question of whether the constituents of entire paint manufacturing population. modeled emission control dust in the concern are likely to occur in the waste. These adjustments improve our combined solids assessment because the We agree that this is a key question in extrapolation from survey data to the only constituent that would be a basis making the listing determination. In paint universe and, hence, improve our for listing emission control dust is addition to risk assessment results, there estimates of waste quantity. antimony. They contend that we should are a number of additional factors that Summarized below are the major not have modeled organic constituents we considered in making the listing comments, our responses, and further in emission control dust because there determination. These are discussed statistical refinements we performed to
VerDate 11
address the commenter’s issues. In the facilities in the paint manufacturing Of the 880 facilities removed, 705 had following subsections, we discuss: (1) facilities universe, we believe the Dun insufficient information on the type of the database used for developing the and Bradstreet database provided the paint products manufactured to be fully survey; (2) the important aspects of the best source of information for our classified into the various strata. Thus, original sampling framework design survey, and we are continuing to use we excluded the 705 entries from the criticized by some commenters; (3) the this database for the final determination sampling frame to increase the chances key statistical issues raised by the today. of obtaining useful data (e.g., waste commenters and our efforts to refine the b. Original Statistical Design and management practices by in-scope paint facility stratification and weighting Analysis of the RCRA Section 3007 manufacturers) for this listing scheme in response to comments; (4) the Survey determination. Nevertheless, these 705 post-survey adjustments of statistical facilities were still assumed to be weights to improve data extrapolation; For our RCRA Section 3007 survey of represented by the sampling population and, (5) our use of adjusted weights for paint manufacturers (see 66 FR 10069— of 884 facilities and thus were not the final risk assessment. 10072 on how the Agency designed the excluded from the evaluation of paint statistical, stratified random-sampling manufacturing wastes. To relate the data a. Use of the Dun and Bradstreet survey), we derived a sampling Database collected from the surveyed facilities to population of 884 facilities from the the entire paint universe including the As explained in the proposed rule (at Dun and Bradstreet database purchased 705, we extrapolated statistically by 10 66 FR 10070), we used the Dun and in July 1999. This database contained using the percentages of facilities in the Bradstreet database for developing our a total of 1,764 facilities identified Dun and Bradstreet database that are survey scheme because it provided the under SIC Code 2851. Discussed below represented by the surveyed facilities most thorough listing of paint are some aspects of our sample frame (66 FR 10072). manufacturers in the United States. design and stratification that were We applied a statistical weighting and Specifically, we used the following criticized by some commenters. bias correction procedure to produce information contained in the Dun and We first screened the July 1999 unbiased estimates from our survey Bradstreet database for developing the database and removed the 880 facilities data. This was necessary because we survey scheme: facility names and that fell into one of the following had sampling rates that were not addresses, contact names and telephone categories: apparent non-paint proportional to the facility population numbers, annual sales volume data, and manufacturers, duplicates, no longer in sizes within each strata. We then used SIC codes for the types of paint or paint- the December 1999 database, outside of the extrapolated waste quantity the scope of this listing determination, related products manufactured. One estimates for characterizing the entire or found impossible to fully classify for commenter argued that EPA arbitrarily paint manufacturers’ universe, and for facility stratification. We then classified relied on outdated and unverified our economic impact analysis and waste the remaining 884 facilities into 12 commercial corporate information treatment and management capacity strata based on three categorization instead of actual facility specific analyses. For risk modeling purposes, criteria: paint types (architectural/ information. However, the commenter we estimated a national waste quantity special purpose, and OEM), sales did not describe in their comments any distribution for the 884 facilities alternative source of ‘‘actual facility volume (less than five million, five to included in the sampling frame. For the specific information’’ readily available twenty million, and greater than twenty purposes of the risk assessment, we to us before conducting the survey. Nor million), and TRI status (whether the assumed the 884 facilities were did they identify an alternative source facility reported under TRI in 1997). proportionally the same as the 705 when directly asked. The strata were intended to group those 11 Our only alternative to relying on this facilities we believed would have facilities. Since the risk assessment existing database would have been to somewhat similar characteristics, for would not be impacted by the number collect the pre-survey information of example, similar waste amounts and of facilities but only by the shape and interest (e.g., facility size, paint types, types of waste generated and similar nature of the distribution, this etc.) from the entire universe of paint waste management practices. proportional handling of the 705 manufacturers for sample frame design The sales volume data in the Dun and facilities had no impact on the results of and stratification. In light of the large Bradstreet database contained a number the risk assessment. number of potential paint manufacturers of ‘‘zero’’ entries for a significant One commenter argued that most (1,764 listed under SIC Code 2851 in the number of facilities. It was possible that paint manufacturing sites use the same July 1999 Dun and Bradstreet database), some facilities did not sell any paints equipment, same pollution control this was impractical. Under the during the reporting period, or did not devices, have similar formulas and have Paperwork Reduction Act, Federal report their sales volume, or reported similar manufacturing processes. agencies are required to submit an zero sales for other reasons. However, Therefore, the commenter argued that Information Collection Request (ICR) to for the reasons discussed above, it was EPA should have used a realistic, and receive approval from the Office of impracticable for us to contact every simpler extrapolation tool such as Management and Budget (OMB) prior to individual facility shown with a zero or pound or gallon of waste per gallon of collecting substantially similar missing sales volume. Because most product produced. However, the information from ten or more facilities in the paint industry are commenter did not provide any respondents in any 12-month period. relatively small, we believe it was specifics or necessary information on Collecting pre-survey information reasonable to have classified those 11 We assumed that the 705 facilities could be would have required separate ICR facilities with zero sales as ‘‘small.’’ stratified in the same manner as the 884 facilities, approval and additional time to gather such that both groups of facilities would have the the information; but such time was not 10 The July 1999 Dun and Bradstreet database we same distribution of statistical weights and available to us under the consent initially purchased for preliminary analysis associated waste quantities, characteristics and contained no sales volume data. In December 1999, management practices. In other words, the same decree. In the absence of ‘‘actual facility we purchased another version containing sales distributions of waste stream data and waste specific information’’ or pre-survey volume data as a supplement for sampling volume percentiles could be developed from both information of interest for all the stratification. sets for risk assessment.
VerDate 11
how to apply its suggested approach. discussed below. But, we do accept the quantities to estimate the economic Therefore, we could not evaluate this commenter’s information as to the two impact of the proposed rule on paint approach. In addition, from our survey miscategorized facilities as correct. manufacturing and our waste treatment we learned that approximately 27% of In response to the comment that the and management capacity analysis. paint manufacturers did not generate or 705 facilities should have been included Relative to the TRI status of certain dispose of any of the waste residuals of in the sampling frame, we did not facilities, we wish to clarify that the interest because they recycled or reused include them in the sampling facilities classified in our TRI categories all paint residuals as feedstock in the population for two key reasons. First, for the survey reflect those TRI manufacturing processes. Using the we could not distinguish paint and generators that reported chemical commenter’s suggested ‘‘simpler’’ coatings manufacturers from releases in 1997 to land-based waste approach would flatly discount this manufacturers of products outside the management units (landfills, surface 100% reuse/recycling scenario resulting scope of the listing determination. impoundments, waste piles, etc.) of in an overestimation of waste quantities Second, we could not distinguish concern to this listing determination. and an inaccurate account of waste architectural/special purpose paints Consequently, some surveyed facilities quantity distributions. from original equipment manufacturing that reported only non-land-based (OEM) paint types, and believed that releases (e.g., air emissions, energy c. Commenter’s Issues Concerning this could be significant (based on recovery) in 1997 were not included in Incorrect Statistical Weights for Survey survey data, we later decided not to the TRI categories for survey sampling. Responses Used To Calculate Waste distinguish between these). Moreover, some facilities in the Quantities In the Dun and Bradstreet database sampling population that might have One commenter objected to our use of used to establish our stratification reported TRI chemical releases to land- the statistical weights resulting from the scheme, the 705 facilities were listed based management units in the years sampling stratification to characterize under a general Dun and Bradstreet SIC before and/or after 1997 were not the industry’s waste quantities. This code, 2851 0000,12 for undefined paint included in the TRI categories either. commenter also stated that EPA’s and allied paint products, some of Concerning the three facilities that one weighting factors resulting from the which are not subject to this listing commenter argued should have been sampling stratification were arbitrary determination. In contrast, among the classified into TRI instead of non-TRI and resulted in an overstatement of the defined groups, we could distinguish categories, they did not report any total waste generated by the industry. In between architectural/special purpose chemical releases to land-based particular, this commenter argued that paint types (under code 2851 0100 management units in 1997. For this EPA used information from the survey through 0109) and OEM paint types reason, we did not reclassify them into to characterize the 705 facilities that (under code 2851 0200 through 0213), TRI categories. could not be stratified for the survey. and remove those not of concern (e.g., Next, the claim that the sampling or The commenter contended that this 2851 0104—paint driers; 2851 0300 statistical weights resulting from the improper use of unverified data very through 0302—putty, wood fillers and stratification are incorrect because some likely mischaracterized the universe of sealers; 2851 04 through 0403— facilities were not classified into the paint manufacturers and led to an removers and cleaners). Since there was appropriate strata reflects a overestimation of waste quantities. a greater degree of uncertainty in the misunderstanding of what weighting This commenter further argued that group of 705 undefined facilities (about represents in probability sampling. The the Agency mischaracterized some large whether they might be subject to this statistical weights assigned to facilities facilities as small and some TRI listing determination) than the defined in the various sampling strata reflect or facilities as non-TRI facilities, and that groups, and since we could not stratify indicate the probability of a facility those facilities were assigned incorrect the 705 facilities into the desired being sampled from the population in a weighting factors. The commenter cited architectural/special purpose and OEM stratum, depending on how the facilities specific errors in EPA’s facility categories, we decided not to sample were categorized for sample selection, categorization and the weighting factors them. Nevertheless, as already not on their true status. For example, if assigned to four facilities generating indicated, we did include the 705 100 facilities were placed in one stratum large waste quantities, indicating that facilities when extrapolating waste and 10 facilities were randomly the waste quantity distributions used for quantities for the entire paint universe. sampled, each sampled facility would our risk assessment of waste solids were We did this by assuming that the have a weight of 10. Misclassification or improperly driven by the incorrect characteristics of the 705 facilities were miscategorization of some facilities does weighting factors for the cited facilities. proportionate to the characteristics of not make the weights incorrect. In Two of the cited facilities (survey the sampling population. We used these particular, the two misclassified large respondents) also submitted comments facilities cited by the commenters may in support of this argument. One 12 Each entry in the Dun and Bradstreet database be representative of other large facilities pointed out that EPA miscategorized its is identified by an 8-digit code, the first four being potentially misclassified in the same facility as small with sales less than $5 the same as SIC’s and the next four being manner. However, we recognize million based on the Dun and Bradstreet proprietary to Dun and Bradstreet that represent miscategorization could result in segregation of the paints, varnishes, lacquers, database when their 1998 sales volume enamels, allied products, etc. in more detail. For increased uncertainty because facility was actually $109.1 million; the other example, code 2851 0000 refers to paints, varnishes, characteristics within the stratum, in commenter similarly said that its 1998 lacquers, enamels, and allied products; code 2851 this case waste generation rates, have a sales were actually $30 million, not the 0100 refers to paint and paint additives; code 2851 much broader range of values than 0104 refers to paint driers; code 2851 0200 refers $7 million reported in the Dun and to lacquers, varnishes, enamels, and other coatings; anticipated. As such, the variability of Bradstreet database. The first code 2851 0208 refers to polyurethane coatings; estimates from survey data could be commenter stated that the weights for code 2851 0300 refers to putty, wood fillers and large. Our plan for post-survey such miscategorized facilities should be sealers; code 2851 0400 refers to removers and adjustments to facility stratification and cleaners. For more details, see the Listing corrected by moving these facilities to Background Document for Paint Manufacturing sampling weights, as described below, the correct strata. We do not agree with Listing Determination available in the public essentially treats the two large facilities the commenter in this respect, as docket. that were misclassified in the ‘‘small’’
VerDate 11
facility strata as representative of other sample distribution more representative this, we decided to use the ‘‘number of large facilities that could have been of the sampling population of 884 employees’’ data for post-stratification similarly miscategorized in the same facilities and the universe of paint of the facilities originally classified in database. This approach reduces the manufacturers. We did this by using the the ‘‘Small, non-TRI’’ categories since variability of survey estimates. following steps: employee data in the database were Although our stratified random- (i) Post-stratify the ‘‘small’’ facility essentially complete and would offer a sampling survey was designed in a categories based on the ‘‘number of reasonable measure of facility size (for manner to ensure the best possible employees’’ data in the Dun and more detail see ‘‘Addendum to the Risk coverage, we acknowledged in the Bradstreet database. Assessment Technical Background proposed rule (66 FR 10072) that, as in (ii) Adjust statistical weights to Document for the Paint and Coatings any other survey, there was uncertainty compensate for the seven facilities that Hazardous Waste Listing in our survey due to potential data did not respond to the survey. Determination’’ which is available in source and sampling errors. Post-survey (iii) Collapse two sets of statistical the docket for today’s final adjustment of sampling weights (i.e., re- weights resulting from the two rounds determination). weighting) to correct miscategorization of sampling. On the other hand, we maintained the and improve the certainty in the results (iv) Examine the list of 705 facilities ‘‘Large’’ and ‘‘Medium’’ categories as involves a process called post- previously excluded from the sampling originally stratified as there is no stratification and it is a common and stratification, and include potentially compelling reason to discount the sales appropriate statistical practice to help in-scope paint manufacturers for the volume data for those large and medium reduce the uncertainty associated with development of statistical weights for facilities. estimates from the sampling survey. the paint universe. Adjust Statistical Weights To There are well known statistical We discuss these steps in more detail Compensate for the Seven Facilities techniques (e.g., Cochran, W.G. 1977 13) below. That Did Not Respond to the Survey that can be used for post-stratification Post-Stratify the ‘‘Small’’ Facility and are widely employed in U.S. Categories Based on the ‘‘Number of Out of the 299 facilities surveyed, national surveys. Therefore, we Employees’’ Data in the Dun and seven facilities did not respond to the developed post-survey adjustments to Bradstreet Database questionnaires. Using survey data from the survey weights to address the issues the respondents inevitably caused some We reexamined the Dun and raised by the commenter concerning the bias, though insignificant in this case, in Bradstreet database used to assess miscategorization of facilities and the data extrapolation to the sampling whether the Agency mischaracterized inappropriate extrapolation to the population of 884 facilities (and in turn some surveyed facilities. We found that additional 705 facilities that were not to the paint universe). That is, without the two facilities cited by the included in the sampling population. accounting for the seven nonresponding commenters (as miscategorized ‘‘small’’) We did not simply reclassify the strata facilities, the total waste generation had zero sales; one facility had 300 of the two miscategorized facilities (due might have been slightly employees and the other facility had to incorrect sales volume information in underestimated. None of the 125 employees in the Dun and the Dun and Bradstreet database) commenters raised this issue. We, Bradstreet database. Moreover, we identified by the commenters. Their nevertheless, took this step to improve found numerous zero sales figures in the strata status cannot be simply changed the statistical validity of our database. Based on our analyses, many by moving them into another stratum methodology. We adjusted the statistical of these zero sales figures were because that would violate the weights to compensate for the aggregated and reported under a underlying probability structure of the nonresponse among the six surveyed corporate or headquarters office such survey. Some other surveyed facilities facilities that we were able to contact. that sales volume figures for their may be similarly mischaracterized in These were determined to be eligible for multiple individual facilities showed the same database, especially in regards the survey because they were in zero. For instance, thirteen facilities to the facilities that had zero sales or business in 1998. (Eligibility only refers with the same company name but missing data listed in the Dun and to whether the facility was in business different addresses and different facility Bradstreet database. Unless accurate and could respond to the survey, not identification numbers carried the same sales data can also be obtained for all whether the facility was a paint headquarters identification number; one the other facilities in the target manufacturer.) This allows the of these facilities had a large sales population, it is inappropriate to just respondents to represent the volume while twelve had zero sales partially reclassify the two facilities nonrespondents. volume. We interpret this scenario as with verified data. the headquarters reporting the Collapse Two Sets of Statistical Weights d. Post-Survey Adjustments to Weights aggregated sales volume under the Resulting From the Two Rounds of Sampling As explained above and in more headquarters address. For the other zero detail in ‘‘Addendum to the Risk sales figures, we surmise they could be As described in the listing Assessment Technical Background due to a variety of reasons: There were background document available in the Document for the Paint and Coatings no sales in the reporting period, sales public docket for the proposed rule, the Hazardous Waste Listing data were not released to Dun and Agency conducted two rounds of Determination’’ available in the public Bradstreet; or there were reporting or sampling in February and March 2000. docket, we performed post-survey entry errors in the database. All the That is, we initially sent out stratification (or post-stratification) and facilities with zero sales in the sampling questionnaires to 250 facilities, after re-weighting to improve our population were in the ‘‘small’’ which we discovered that only facilities extrapolation from the survey data to categories (i.e., Small, non-TRI, SIC located in States from Alabama through the 705 facilities, and to make the 2851–01; Small, non-TRI, SIC 2851–02; Ohio (alphabetically) were sampled. In Small, TRI, SIC 2851–01; Small, TRI, order to correct this error, we sent out 13 Cochran, W.G. 1977. Sampling Techniques, 3rd SIC 2851–02), with the majority in the additional questionnaires to 49 facilities edition, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 428 pp. two ‘‘Small, non-TRI’’ strata. Based on located in states after Ohio
VerDate 11
(alphabetically), which were randomly architectural/special purpose and OEM note that these two facilities generated selected using the same statistical categories. By the same token, after relatively higher quantities of methodology. This resulted in two sets combining the 660 and 884 facilities nonhazardous waste solids among the of facilities with differing sampling into the full target population of 1,544 various quantities modeled for the weights. While using the two sets of facilities, we could no longer stratify all landfill disposal scenario. Changing weights for population extrapolation the facilities into architectural/special their statistical weights would affect the was statistically valid, we decided to purpose and OEM categories. Since waste quantity distributions and could collapse the ‘‘through Ohio’’ stratum paint type was not a relevant factor in conceivably result in somewhat with the ‘‘after Ohio’’ stratum to reduce our analyses (i.e., from the survey we different risk assessment results. As we sampling variances and unequal found no significant difference between noted above, we consider simply weighting effects. We believe that the the two types of paint production in changing these two weights to be alphabetical position of the states terms of waste types and amounts statistically incorrect. Nevertheless, we within strata bears no relationship to the generated, waste characteristics and conducted this bounding analysis for survey outcomes, and thus collapsing constituents, and waste management two key target constituents, acrylamide the ‘‘through Ohio’’ stratum with the practices), this did not affect the validity and antimony. The results indicate that ‘‘after Ohio’’ stratum would not of the categorization. the changes made to the waste quantity introduce bias. As demonstrated in the Taking steps (i) to (iii), as outlined in distributions do not appear to have a ‘‘Addendum to the Risk Assessment IV.B.4.d, we developed post-strata and significant impact on the proposed Technical Background Document for the adjusted weights for the sampling listing levels for waste solids, i.e., Paint and Coatings Hazardous Waste population of 884 facilities. Likewise, making these changes would increase Listing Determination’’ available in the taking steps (i) to (iv), as outlined in the listing levels by about a factor of 1.7 public docket, collapsing the two sets of IV.B.4.d, we developed another set of for the two constituents (see Table IV.B– weights reduced the variability in the post-strata and adjusted weights for the 3). sampling weights and improved the paint universe using the target Using the corrected waste solid precision of the survey estimates. population of 1,544 facilities. quantity (as discussed above in section Examine the List of 705 Facilities As a result of the aforementioned IV.B.2), as well as the adjusted Previously Excluded From the Sampling post-stratification and re-weighting, the statistical weights for both the sampling Stratification, and Include Potentially statistical weighting factors assigned to population of 884 and the full target In-Scope Paint Manufacturers for the the surveyed facilities changed population of 1,544 facilities, resulted Development of Statistical Weights for somewhat, as expected. Details about in a modified distribution of the Paint Universe post-stratification and re-weighting, and nonhazardous waste solids going to the statistical techniques used, may be nonhazardous landfills. We note that To address the comment that the found in ‘‘Addendum to the Risk adjusting the weights did not change the Agency improperly assumed that the Assessment Technical Background distribution significantly. Specifically, facilities in the sampling population of Document for the Paint and Coatings the percentile 14 quantities from the 884 facilities were representative of Hazardous Waste Listing resulting waste quantity distributions, those in the group of 705 undefined Determination’’ available in the public which generally represent the facilities previously excluded from the docket. characteristics of the paint universe’s sampling stratification, we reexamined nonhazardous waste solids that are the Dun and Bradstreet database to e. Adjusted Statistical Analyses of landfilled, essentially remain as determine which of the 705 previously RCRA Section 3007 Survey Data originally estimated with slight excluded facilities also could be in- We conducted three adjusted variations. We realize that there is a scope paint manufacturers. We statistical analyses to derive the waste greater degree of uncertainty in the eliminated 45 duplicates and added the quantity distributions as inputs to the adjusted weights and statistical analysis remaining 660 possible in-scope paint risk modeling, including: for the full target population of 1,544 manufacturers to the sampling facilities than the sampling population population of 884 to become the full list —One bounding analysis, using the of 884 facilities, because it is likely that of 1,544 facilities (hereafter referred to revised weights suggested by one more of the 660 (out of 705) facilities are as the full target population) potentially commenter for the two facilities producing products outside the scope of subject to the listing. We included these miscategorized as small, without the rulemaking. Therefore, we maintain 660 possible in-scope facilities in our making any other weight adjustments; our conclusion that the waste quantity post-survey analyses, for comparison of —One analysis using adjusted weights distributions (whether adjusted or not) the results based on the full target for the sampling population of 884 for the sampling population of 884 population with those based on the facilities per post-survey adjustment sampling population (i.e., assessing the and re-weighting (but not the two facilities should be more representative impact of analysis with or without revised weights suggested by the of the paint universe than those for the including the 660 facilities). However, commenter); and full target population of 1,544 facilities. we note that we still could not tell —One analysis using adjusted weights As such, we performed an adjusted which and how many of these 660 for the entire paint universe per post- statistical analysis of nonhazardous facilities might be associated with the survey adjustment and re-weighting waste solids going to nonhazardous paint types of interest to this listing (but not the two revised weights landfills for the sampling population of determination, and thus the uncertainty suggested by the commenter). 884 facilities. Nonetheless, we also in the group of 705 undefined facilities To assess the impact of changing performed a similar adjusted statistical persists and carries over to the full weights for the two facilities analysis for the full target population of target population of 1,544 facilities. mischaracterized as small, we initially 1,544 facilities for comparison. The final Moreover, as discussed above, we conducted a bounding analysis using 14 A percentile of a distribution represents a value could not distinguish the types of paint the revised weights (one changed from below which a specified percentage of the data lie. production for the group of 660 4.0476 to 1, and the other from 7.6154 For example, the 50th percentile is the value that undefined facilities to classify them into to 1) suggested by one commenter. We 50% of the data lie below.
VerDate 11
results revealed that neither of these two weights in conjunction with a correction Assessment Technical Background adjusted statistical analyses would to the shower model inhalation Document for the Paint and Coatings significantly impact the risk assessment exposure for non-carcinogens Hazardous Waste Listing results. (addressed in section IV.B.4) are Determination’’ available in the public Results of the final risk assessment summarized in Table IV.B–3. For docket. using revised/adjusted statistical details, see ‘‘Addendum to the Risk
TABLE IV.B–3—RISK CONCENTRATION LEVELS FOR COMBINED WASTE SOLIDS (MG/KG) 1
Original level from Level resulting Level resulting proposal Level resulting from adjusted from adjusted Constituent of concern (*indicates correc- from bounding weights—popu- weights—Popu- tion for shower analysis 2 lation of 884 facili- lation of 1,544 fa- model error) ties cilities
Acrylamide ...... 470 810 370 250 Acrylonitrile ...... * [440] 3 Not analyzed 340 220 Antimony ...... 3,200 5,300 2,600 1,700 1 Revised results from adjusted weights also reflect the corrections for error in the shower model. 2 Moving two misclassified facilities per comments. 3 It was already known that an error in the shower model would increase this level.
In summary, considering the population of 884 facilities are more Acrylamide and Acrylonitrile uncertainties involved, the originally representative of the paint universe than We proposed listing levels for designed stratified sampling scheme those for the full target population of acrylamide and acrylonitrile based on was statistically valid and thus did not 1,544 facilities. Using the adjusted the limited data we collected in our mischaracterize the paint universe. weights for the sampling population of survey of generators and other However, we agree with the commenters 884 facilities and the corrected waste information indicating that polymers that the two facilities miscategorized as solid quantity in response to comments, derived from acrylamide and ‘‘small’’ due to incorrect sales volume the final risk assessment for combined acrylonitrile are used in paint information in the database should have waste solids resulted in decreased risk manufacturing. Acrylamide and been placed in other categories. Since concentration levels for three acrylonitrile are monomers, i.e., low accurate sales data could not be constituents of concern by about a factor molecular weight chemicals that serve obtained for some other surveyed of 1.3. Even at these lower levels, we do as building blocks to form larger facilities that may be similarly not believe listing paint waste solids is molecular weight polymers that are mischaracterized in the same database, warranted; see detailed discussions in used as binders in paints. We were we did not partially reclassify the strata sections IV.B.5 and IV.B.6 below. concerned about the unreacted of those two miscategorized facilities monomers in the binders, not the because that would violate the 5. Concentration Levels for the Key polymers, due to the known toxicity of underlying probability structure of the Constituents of Concern and the the monomer forms. survey. This mischaracterization Likelihood That They Occur in Wastes Information provided by facilities in resulted in a greater degree of the 3007 Survey indicated that some uncertainty in extrapolation from the As noted above, correcting for an error manufacturers reported the presence of survey data and estimation of waste in the modeling causes two of the five acrylamide or acrylonitrile derived quantities due to higher variability in constituents of concern (methyl isobutyl polymers in wastes. However, the the ‘‘small’’ facility categories than we ketone and methyl methacrylate) to survey showed that these chemicals thought. Nevertheless, we performed drop from further consideration, were reported relatively infrequently. post-survey adjustments to the because the projected risk-based waste Out of the 151 facilities that reported statistical weights in an attempt to concentrations indicate these chemicals generating paint manufacturing wastes, improve data extrapolation, particularly would not present risks of concern in three reported acrylamide polymers in post-stratification of ‘‘small’’ facility paint waste solids. Three potential paint waste solids (off specification categories and incorporation of the 660 constituents of concern remained: paint or sludges); all such wastes were possible in-scope facilities resulting acrylamide, acrylonitrile, and antimony. sent to incinerators. Six facilities from the examination of the 705 We carefully considered the comments reported acrylonitrile polymers in paint previously excluded facilities. While the submitted and all the information waste solids (off specification paint and overall adjustments improved data available to us on the potential for these sludges); for these six facilities, two extrapolation and waste quantity constituents to be present in paint waste reported sending their wastes to estimates, incorporation of the 660 solids at levels of concern. We conclude landfills, while the remainder sent their facilities (into the 884 original sampling that the available information does not wastes to incinerators. The 3007 survey population to become a target indicate that any of these constituents did not provide any useful data for population of 1,544 facilities) provide a sufficient basis for listing monomer levels in these wastes for two contributed to additional uncertainty in paint waste solids. Below we describe reasons. First, submission of the adjusted weights because it is likely the key information we used to reach a concentration information was that more of the 660 facilities are out of final listing determination. We discuss voluntary, and second, the survey the scope of the listing than in the the organic monomers acrylamide and required facilities to note the presence original sampling population of 884 acrylonitrile together because the issues of these constituents as the monomer facilities. We, therefore, maintain our for the two organic chemicals are and associated polymer (e.g., acrylamide conclusion that the waste quantity closely related and somewhat different and acrylamide derived polymers) distributions for the sampling from the issues for antimony. under one combined category. Thus, we
VerDate 11
believe that the limited information on associated polymers into one what we found in the MSDS constituent concentrations only constituent category, so that when information for the proposal, i.e., the provides information on the prevalence facilities noted the presence of the MSDS listed <0.05% (500 ppm) for all of the associated polymer forms, and polymer (e.g., acrylamide derived acrylic monomers present, and does not provide any useful information polymers) in wastes, we incorrectly indicated the presence of a ‘‘trace’’ of on monomer levels. inferred that there are substantial acrylonitrile. Even assuming all of the We discussed the potential levels of monomer (e.g., acrylamide) residuals. monomer in the binder was acrylonitrile in paint binders and paint They did not agree with our use of data acrylonitrile, the fraction of binder used products in the proposed rule (see 66 from MSDS documents, pointing out in the paint product at issue (25%) FR10106–10107). This discussion was that the <0.1% (1000 ppm) residual would yield an upper bound of <125 related to the possible levels of level specified on the MSDS is based on ppm acrylonitrile. We also found one acrylonitrile in liquid paint wastes. the Occupational Safety and Health other reference to acrylonitrile levels of However, this approach leads to an Administration (OSHA) Hazard 50 to 90 ppm in acrylonitrile-butadiene estimate of monomer levels in paint Communication standard that requires copolymer emulsions; however, we products, which is useful for an listing individual carcinogenic could not determine if the polymer was examination of monomer levels in waste constituents if they are present at greater used in paint formulations.17 solids. For the proposal, we cited a than 0.1% (see 29 CFR We were able to find one MSDS that reference that estimated a likely 1910.1200(g)(2)(I)(C)). The commenters listed the presence of acrylamide in a concentration of acrylonitrile in paint of said that the MSDS merely indicates paint binder (styrene-butadiene latex). approximately 30–50 ppm. This was that the residual levels for any of the This listed a level of <50 ppm based on a maximum concentration of monomers present are less than the acrylamide, and indicated that the level 100 ppm acrylonitrile in the polymer 1000 ppm to comply with the standard. of the formaldehyde-derived form of binder, and a fraction of binder in paint The commenters stated that the acrylamide (NMA) was <100 ppm. formulations of 30–50%.15 To estimate manufacturer listed ‘‘trace’’ levels of Thus, it appears that NMA was used as a possible upper bound, we also used acrylonitrile on the MSDS to comply a cross-linking agent and that residual Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for with other reporting requirements (e.g., acrylamide may arise from this use.18 acrylic paint binders, which indicated California Proposition 65). The MSDS indicated that the fraction of that acrylonitrile was present in trace Commenters submitted information to binder used in the paint product was amounts. The sheets did not report support their contention that we 26%, which means that the level of acrylonitrile levels, but showed levels of overestimated possible monomer acrylamide in the paint would be <13 <500 ppm and <1000 ppm for the concentrations in paint wastes. One ppm. monomers from all the acrylic polymer commenter submitted documentation After reviewing information from the sources in the binders. Thus, assuming on acrylonitrile levels from the same proposal, evaluating the information a paint formulation would contain up to binder manufacturer that was the source provided in comments from industry, 50% binder, we calculated an upper of the MSDS documents we cited in the and considering the information on bound of about 500 ppm acrylonitrile in proposal. This documentation showed paint binders, we conclude that the paint. that acrylonitrile levels in binders are concentrations of these monomers in The same reference we cited in the controlled to 10 ppm or less, which is waste are not likely to approach the proposal for acrylonitrile also estimated well below the level of 1000 ppm we listing levels. For acrylonitrile, our a likely concentration range for assumed. In addition, a polymer trade original estimate of up to 30–50 ppm of acrylamide in paint binders.16 The association submitted the results of a acrylonitrile in paint formulations is reference noted that acrylamide is less confidential survey that showed its similar to information from industry widely used than acrylonitrile monomer members reported maximums of 10 to and the limited data from MSDS in paint formulations. With very limited 25 ppm for acrylonitrile in paint documents. Similarly, the limited data data, the reference estimated <5 ppm binders. we have indicate that the levels of acrylamide monomer in paint, based on Commenters stated that acrylamide acrylamide are not likely to approach a maximum binder concentration of polymers are rarely used in paint the listing level. We agree with approximately 20 ppm, and assuming binders. A polymer trade association commenters that the use of acrylamide survey of its members found one limited the acrylamide containing polymer in binders appears to be relatively rare. instance of an acrylamide polymer sold makes up to 25 wt.% of the formulation. Because the OSHA reporting for We received nine comments from as a binder for use in paint MSDS’s only requires listing acrylamide industry and industry associations on formulations; this manufacturer or acrylonitrile if they are present at or the proposed constituents of concern reported a maximum acrylamide level of above 1000 ppm, we cannot absolutely and their concentration levels. All of the 25 ppm and that the product typically rule out that they might be present at commenters raised the point that the contains lower residual levels. levels approaching 1000 ppm in some constituents of concern would not be Commenters indicated that, while binders. If we were to assume that acrylamide may also be used in cross found in paint production wastes at the acrylamide or acrylonitrile levels to be linking other polymer binders, it has levels of concern. Commenters disputed <1000 ppm in paint binders, and if the limited capacity for this unless first our estimates for monomer levels, and binder comprised 25% to 50% of a paint reacted with formaldehyde. This forms stated that we overestimated the formulation, then the upper bound for N-methylolacrylamide (NMA), which is concentrations of acrylonitrile and less toxic. acrylamide monomers likely to be in 17 Barristel E., Bernardi A., Maestri P., Enzymatic In response to these comments, we decontamination of aqueous polymer emulsions paint wastes. They noted that our gathered additional information on the survey combined monomer and containing acrylonitrile. Biotechnology Letters, 19, potential levels of acrylonitrile and 131–134 (1997). acrylamide monomers in paint binders. 18 The MSDS also noted the total residual 15 See the docket for the memo from Paul Denault, monomer content was < 0.5% (5000 ppm). This Dynamac Corporation, to David Carver and Cate We found one other MSDS that listed indicates that the acrylamide (less than 50 ppm) Jenkins, EPA, dated September 6, 2000. the presence of acrylonitrile in a paint makes up very little of the ‘‘residual monomers’’ in 16 ibid. binder. The information was similar to this product.
VerDate 11
paint would be from <250 to <500 ppm. manufacturing. The raw materials data in waste solids, but did not report These concentrations would be in the base we developed for the proposal (66 antimony concentrations, to obtain range of the revised listing levels (e.g., FR 10084) shows that several forms of information on the potential source and the acrylamide and acrylonitrile levels antimony are potentially used in paints, level of antimony. One facility reported are 370 and 340 ppm respectively for most notable being the use of antimony only one ingredient out of hundreds the revised results for the universe of oxide as a flame retardant and/or used that contained antimony in a 884 facilities in Table IV.B–3). However, pigment. Furthermore, the responses to pigment. The company indicated that in we have no indication that such levels our 3007 Survey indicated that a total of the year 2000 it used a total of 50 lbs. are realistic for paint formulations, nor 11 facilities reported the presence of of the pigment, which contained about do we have any information suggesting antimony in some waste (hazardous, 0.8 lbs. of antimony. Therefore, wastes that paint manufacturing wastes would nonhazardous, solid, liquid). Four from this facility are unlikely to contain ever reach these levels. Furthermore, in facilities reported generating antimony at levels of concern.19 The the case of acrylamide, we found only nonhazardous waste solids that other facility is the only one from the three facilities that reported the contained antimony. survey that indicated it uses antimony presence of the polymer in their waste We received four comments, three as a flame retardant component. This solids; all of which was sent to from trade associations and one from an company produced a small volume of incineration. Similarly, only six industry facility, that stated that coating products with antimony levels facilities reported acrylonitrile polymer antimony should not be considered a of 1 to 2%. The facility said that these in waste solids. Therefore, the low constituent of concern. Commenters products account for less than 0.6% of prevalence of acrylamide and stated that the only color pigments coating products manufactured acrylonitrile polymers in paint waste which incorporate antimony are annually, and indicated any levels in solids also indicates that these complex inorganic color pigments. One waste solids would be ‘‘minute.’’ chemicals are unlikely to present a commenter provided references Based on data from our materials data significant risk in these wastes. showing that the most common base, as well as MSDS documents we We agree with commenters that our antimony-derived pigments (chrome obtained, we recognize that some fire- use of the 1000 ppm concentration of antimony titanate and nickel antimony retardant coatings may contain monomers in paint binders from the titanate) contain an extremely stable and relatively high levels of antimony MSDS represents an implausible case; insoluble form of antimony in a compounds (from 1.8 to <8%). this assumed that all of the residual calcined matrix with titanium dioxide, Therefore, we contacted an additional 5 monomer would be the monomer of which does not present risks. Other facilities from the Dun and Bradstreet concern, and that the constituent would commenters indicated that antimony data base, which were not included in be present at the upper bound level oxide is used in paints as a pigment, but the survey, that appeared to be (assumptions for which we have no argued that antimony pigments are used manufacturing flame-retardant paints or factual support and are implausible in small amounts and make up a small coatings. In all cases, the facilities based on the information in the record). fraction (<1%) of pigments used. indicated that the industry was moving These assumptions were appropriate for In response to these comments, we away from antimony-based fire- the purpose of estimating an upper reexamined the data we had for retardant coatings and toward organic- bound for acrylonitrile levels in paint antimony in paint wastes from our 3007 based products. One of the 5 facilities liquid wastes to illustrate that this Survey. Eight of the 11 facilities that indicated it still used antimony oxide in constituent was highly unlikely to reported antimony in their wastes some products at levels of 0.5 to 1%. present risks in liquid wastes that are provided estimates of antimony levels. However, this facility said it does not managed in tanks. However, based on Generally, these levels were below generate waste solids, but only wash the information provided by levels of concern and were usually water, which is sent offsite for commenters and our supplemental presented as ‘‘less than’’ values. We treatment. investigations performed in response to closely examined the information for As noted by the commenters, there is those comments, we do not believe that the four facilities that reported the some limited use of antimony the levels of these two constituents are presence of antimony in nonhazardous compounds in paint pigments. In likely to approach 1000 ppm. The waste solids. Two provided estimates of addition to use of antimony titanate information in our possession indicates antimony levels in the survey: one compounds noted above, we also found that the highest expected concentrations generator reported very low levels MSDS data showing some use of are likely to be less than 50 to 100 ppm (<0.031%), and one reported potentially antimony oxide in lead chromate paints in paint binders, which would lead to significant levels (1% in sludges). at levels of 1 to 2%. However, we do not levels in paint and associated wastes However, when we called to confirm the believe that the use of antimony in lead (<25 to <50 ppm) that are well below the 1% value, this facility revised its chromate paints would present levels of concern. We would be estimate for sludges to 0.1% (1000 significant risks, because we expect that speculating without information or ppm). The facility contact indicated that facilities already handle wastes from technical support to assume higher they do not use antimony compounds in such paints as hazardous waste under levels in the waste. Therefore, we have their products, and suggested that any the RCRA TC regulations (40 CFR decided that neither acrylamide nor antimony would be due to trace levels 261.24) due to the high levels of acrylonitrile warrant inclusion as present in the titanium dioxide used in chromium and lead (26 to 57% lead constituents of concern for listing waste paint formulations. The facility chromate) in these products.20 solids from paint manufacturing. provided information from its supplier for titanium dioxide that indicated 19 Antimony Using this facility’s reported volume of paint levels of antimony were low (<10 ppm). manufacturing waste solids in 1998 (43,266 gallons We proposed listing levels for Thus, we consider the facility’s revised or 394,245 kg), even assuming all the antimony was antimony based on the data we estimate as a conservative estimate of passed through to the wastes would yield <0.0001% antimony on an annual basis. collected in our survey of generators potential antimony levels. 20 The TC threshold for leachable lead, for and other information indicating that We contacted the other two facilities example, is 5 mg/L or 5 ppm. We found in the 3007 antimony compounds are used in paint that reported the presence of antimony Continued
VerDate 11
In summary, after considering the modeling. We believe our original —Have an annual effect on the economy available information on antimony use sampling scheme is statistically valid; of $100 million or more, or adversely and the potential for waste to contain the revised analyses show that different affect in a material way the economy, this constituent, we do not now believe approaches to estimating waste volumes a sector of the economy, productivity, that the information in hand supports a do not significantly alter the results (see competition, jobs, the environment, listing for this constituent. While Table IV.B–3). Correcting for an error in public health or safety, or State, local, antimony has some use in paint the modeling causes two constituents to or tribal governments or communities; formulations, we did not find any waste drop from further consideration (methyl —Create a serious inconsistency or from the surveyed facilities that methacrylate and methyl isobutyl otherwise interfere with an action contained antimony at levels that would ketone). taken or planned by another agency; approach the listing level. The most A critical factor in this listing —Materially alter the budgetary impact likely wastes to have high levels of determination is the concentrations of of entitlements, grants, user fees, or antimony would be from the production the constituents of concern in the waste loan programs or rights and of fire-retardant paints, e.g., off (factor (viii)). After considering obligations or recipients thereof; or specification products could contain 1 information from the proposal, the —Raise novel legal or policy issues to 2% antimony. However, comments on the proposed rule, and arising out of legal mandates, the manufacturers are moving away from other sources (e.g., MSDS documents), President’s priorities, or the antimony to organic-based fire- we do not believe the concentrations of principles set forth in Executive Order retardants, and we found very few acrylamide and acrylonitrile in paint 12866. facilities that reported using antimony wastes approach the revised listing Today’s final determination was in such formulations. Therefore, a levels. Similarly, after considering the submitted to OMB for review. Pursuant listing based on antimony would only available information on antimony use to the terms of the Executive Order, the be addressing potential wastes from the and the potential for waste to contain Agency, in conjunction with OMB, has production of a small proportion of this constituent, we do not believe we determined that today’s final highly specialized products (e.g., fire- have a sound basis to list this waste for determination on paint production retardant paints). The one facility we this constituent. We did not find any wastes was significant because of novel found that generates waste solids that surveyed facility that generated wastes policy issues. Changes made in response may originate from flame retardant with antimony concentrations that to OMB suggestions or coatings containing antimony (1–2%) would approach the listing level. While recommendations are documented in confirmed that these products account antimony has some use in paint the public record. for less than 0.6% of its production line. formulations, paint manufacturers are The aggregate annualized social costs Products with high antimony levels moving away from uses of most for this final rule are generally appear to be a small fraction of paints potential concern (e.g., in fire-retardant equivalent to baseline costs. and coatings produced, and even the paints). We also conclude that products Furthermore, this rule is not expected to facilities that use antimony appear with high antimony levels are a small adversely affect, in a material way, the unlikely to generate waste with fraction of paints produced, and even economy, a sector of the economy, significant levels on an annual basis. We the facilities that use antimony are productivity, competition, jobs, the believe such antimony wastes, even if unlikely to generate wastes that present environment, public health or safety, or they exist, would be generated risks of concern. State, local, or tribal governments or infrequently and would not pose Finally, we considered the impact of communities. The benefits to human significant risks. other regulatory programs on the health and the environment resulting 6. Conclusion for Paint Production potential management scenarios and the from today’s final determination are Waste Solids associated risks (factor (x)). As equivalent to baseline benefits. In short, explained previously, we find that the today’s final determination imposes no We are making a final determination costs to industry and government and not to list waste solids from paint existing RCRA regulations for wastes limit potential risks that may arise from provides no benefits to human health manufacturing. As noted in Section II of and the environment. today’s notice, we applied the factors the use of antimony in paints containing under 261.11(a)(3) in making this listing pigments such as lead chromate. B. What Economic and Equity Analyses determination. Most of these factors are Therefore, after considering these Were Completed in Support of the incorporated into our risk assessment factors, we conclude that the available Proposed Listing for Paint Production methodology (factors (i) through (viii) , information for these constituents Wastes? including constituent toxicity, indicates that listing paint waste solids is not warranted. We prepared an Economic constituent concentration, constituent Assessment22 in support of the February fate and transport, and waste V. Analytical and Regulatory 13, 2001 proposed rule. We found that volumes).21 In this regard, we revised Requirements the proposal would have resulted in our risk assessment to incorporate incremental compliance costs to adjusted waste volume estimates and A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review selected paint and coatings also to correct for an error in the manufacturers who were subject to Under Executive Order 12866, EPA rule’s requirements. In most cases, these Survey that facilities coded paint manufacturing must determine whether a regulatory manufacturers would have experienced waste solids as TC hazardous (D008) when wastes contained levels of 0.02 to 3% lead, well below the action is significant and, therefore, incremental costs related to both RCRA levels found in lead chromate paints. subject to comprehensive review by the administrative and Land Disposal 21 Note that we also considered whether any Office of Management and Budget damage cases arose from the mismanagement of (OMB), and the other provisions of the 22 U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste, Economic paint manufacturing wastes (factor (ix)). We Assessment for the Proposed Concentration-Based determined that the available data did not provide Executive Order. A significant Listing of Wastewaters and Non-wastewaters from useful information for a listing determination (see regulatory action is defined by the Order the Production of Paints and Coatings—Final 66 FR 10082–10083). as one that may: Report, January 19, 2001.
VerDate 11
Restriction (LDR) requirements. We also permit. Total incremental compliance Wastewaters and Non-wastewaters from found that there may have been minor costs under the traditional or non- the Production of Paints and Coatings, cost impacts to Subtitle D landfill concentration-based option were January 19, 2001, was prepared in operators, if they would have needed to estimated at $10.9 million per year. response to requirements established install tanks and/or piping systems in Under this option, 100 percent of the under to Regulatory Flexibility Act order to take advantage of the proposed targeted waste would have become (RFA), as amended by the Small temporary deferral under the Clean hazardous. At time of the proposal, we Business Regulatory Enforcement Water Act. Furthermore, because paint examined the no-list option as one Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. and coatings are so widely used alternative to the Agency’s proposed 601 et.seq. Findings from this analysis throughout all sectors of the U.S. approach. Costs under the no-list option indicated that the rule, as proposed, economy, any direct cost impacts to this were found to be zero, except perhaps would not have resulted in significant industry would likely have rippled for the negligible costs associated with economic impacts on a substantial throughout the economy in the form of reading of the final rule for number of small business paint marginally higher prices or product informational purposes. manufacturers potentially subject to the alterations to users of the affected We were not able to monetize the rule’s requirements. The RFSA products. The extent of any price change in net welfare potentially document is available in the docket modification would have depended resulting from the proposed rule. established for the proposed action. upon marketing decisions by individual However, we were able to qualitatively C. What Substantive Comments Were producers, the availability of direct describe those who were likely to have Received on the Cost/Economic Aspects substitutes, and the regional price been negatively and positively impacted of the Proposed Listing for Paint elasticity of demand for the products of by the rule, as proposed. Positively Production Wastes? concern. impacted groups may have included the Paint and coatings manufacturers are following: paint manufacturers who We received 44 comments in total, listed under the Standard Identification would not have been affected by the including two comments received after Classification (SIC) as industry 2851. rule, hazardous waste management the close of the comment period. Of the The North American Industrial facilities and transporters, and total 44 comments, 20 included some Classification System (NAICS) code for population groups surrounding paint reference to the Economic Assessment, Paint and Coatings is 325510. Based on manufacturing facilities. Negatively Regulatory Flexibility Screening our RCRA 3007 industry survey, we impacted groups may have included Analysis (RFSA), and/or cost and estimated that, at the time of the paint manufacturers who would have economic issues in general. Fifteen of proposal, there were 972 operational been subject to rule requirements, paint these comments were from industry and paint and coatings manufacturing consumers who may be impacted by five were from trade associations. The facilities in the U.S. (See 66 FR 10072). increased prices, and municipal comments can be consolidated into nine Census data indicated that total product landfills had they needed to install new substantive issues. These are: (1) shipments ranged from 1.2 and 1.5 tanks or piping systems. Expansion of 40 CFR part 261— billion gallons per year between 1992 We also examined all relevant Acts appendix VIII, (2) addition of chemicals and 1998, with total 1998 product value and Executive Orders in our assessment as UHCs, (3) addition of chemicals to estimated at $17.2 billion. of impacts potentially associated with F039, (4) analytical issues, (5) cost For the proposed concentration-based the February 13, 2001 proposed action. impacts on remediation wastes, (6) approach, we estimated aggregate These included the following: Executive potential for indirect cost impacts nationwide compliance cost impacts at Order 13045—Children’s Health, occurring to raw material suppliers, (7) $7.3 million per year. Waste Executive Order 12898—Environmental implementation concerns, (8) scope management costs were found to Justice, Executive Order 13132— concerns, and, (9) baseline requirements represent 81.3 percent of this total, Federalism, Executive Order 13175— may impact the need for a final rule. followed by RCRA administration costs Consultation and Coordination with As described in section IV, our final at 9.3 percent. Analytical and hazardous Indian Tribal Governments, Unfunded determination not to list any of the waste transport costs were found to each Mandates Reform Act. Overall, we targeted paint production wastes was represent about 4.7 percent of the total found that the rule, as proposed, was based on considerations other than cost/ annual cost. The first scenario under not subject to these Orders and/or Acts economic issues presented by this proposed approach assumed that due to the economic threshold or, no commenters. Therefore, none of the the newly listed wastes currently going impacts were identified, or both. public comments on the above to hazardous waste fuel blending or The January 19, 2001 Economic substantive economic issues, or any directly to hazardous waste burning Assessment provides detailed specific economic comment, impacted cement kilns would be diverted to information on the analytical our final no-list determination. As such, commercial incineration at a higher methodology, data, and limitations we have not prepared specific responses cost. Although this is not likely to associated with our cost analysis. This to these comments. However, we occur, it was considered here as a document also presents a detailed recognize and acknowledge the key sensitivity scenario. Under this review of how we analyzed each economic issues and concerns raised by scenario, total nationwide costs relevant Executive Order and Act. This commenters. These issues are increased to $18.1 million per year. The document is available in the docket summarized in our response-to- second scenario examined total costs for established for the proposed action. comments document. This document, listing only paint production waste In addition to the Economic entitled: Public Comment Summary and solids. The total costs under this Assessment, we conducted a Regulatory Response Document addressing scenario were estimated at $6.7 million Flexibility Screening Analysis (RFSA) Economic Issues Associated With the per year. This scenario may more in support of the February 13, 2001 Proposed Listing for Paint Production closely approach actual costs should proposed rule. This analysis, entitled: Wastes, in support of the Paint generators divert all liquid wastes to Regulatory Flexibility Screening Production Wastes Final Determination, exclusive management in tanks and Analysis for the Proposed is available in the docket established for discharge to a POTW, or under a NPDES Concentration-Based Listing of today’s final determination.
VerDate 11
D. What Are the Potential Costs and that this action will not have a proposals with significant Federal Benefits of Today’s Final significant economic impact on a intergovernmental mandates, and Determination? substantial number of small entities. informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with The value of any regulatory action is F. Was the Unfunded Mandates Reform traditionally measured by the net the regulatory requirements. Act Considered in This Final Today’s final determination is not change in social welfare that it Determination? subject to the requirements of sections generates. All other factors being equal, Executive Order 12875, ‘‘Enhancing 202 and 205 of UMRA. Today’s final a rule that generates positive net welfare the Intergovernmental Partnership’’ determination will not result in $100 would be advantageous to society, while (October 26, 1993), called on federal million or more in incremental a rule that results in negative net agencies to provide a statement expenditures. The aggregate annualized welfare to society should be avoided. supporting the need to issue any incremental social costs for today’s final Today’s final determination is regulation containing an unfunded determination are projected to be near expected to generally impose no costs federal mandate and describing prior zero. Furthermore, today’s final on industry. Thus, aside from the consultation with representatives of determination is not subject to the negligible burden of reading and affected state, local, and tribal requirements of section 203 of UMRA. understanding the relevant section of governments. Signed into law on March Section 203 requires agencies to develop the Federal Register, the incremental 22, 1995, the Unfunded Mandates a small government Agency plan before burden to industry is expected to be Reform Act (UMRA) supersedes establishing any regulatory zero. Benefits to human health and the Executive Order 12875, reiterating the requirements that may significantly or environment potentially associated with previously established directives while uniquely affect small governments, today’s final determination will also imposing additional requirements including tribal governments. We have generally be equivalent to baseline for federal agencies issuing any determined that this final determination conditions. regulation containing an unfunded will not significantly or uniquely affect E. What Consideration Was Given to mandate. small governments. Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Small Entities Under the Regulatory G. Were Equity Issues and Children’s Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public Law 104–4, establishes requirements for Health Considered in This Final the Small Business Regulatory Determination? Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 Federal agencies to assess the effects of (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq.? their regulatory actions on State, local, By applicable executive order, we are and tribal governments and the private required to consider the impacts of The RFA generally requires an agency sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, today’s rule with regard to to prepare a regulatory flexibility EPA generally must prepare a written environmental justice and children’s analysis of any rule subject to notice statement, including a cost-benefit health. and comment rulemaking requirements analysis, for proposed and final rules under the Administrative Procedures with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 1. Executive Order 13045: ‘‘Protection of Act or any other statute, unless the result in expenditures to State, local, Children from Environmental Health agency certifies that the rule will not and tribal governments, in the aggregate, Risks and Safety Risks’’ have a significant economic impact on or to the private sector, of $100 million ‘‘Protection of Children from a substantial number of small entities. or more in any single year. Before Environmental Health Risks and Safety Small entities include small businesses, promulgating an EPA rule for which a Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) small organizations, and small written statement is needed, section 205 applies to any rule that: (1) Is governmental jurisdictions. For of the UMRA generally requires EPA to determined to be ‘‘economically purposes of assessing the impacts of identify and consider a reasonable significant’’ as defined under Executive today’s final determination on small number of regulatory alternatives and Order 12866, and (2) concerns an entities, a small entity is defined either adopt the least costly, most cost- environmental health or safety risk that by the number of employees or by the effective or least burdensome alternative EPA has reason to believe may have a annual dollar amount of sales/revenues. that achieves the objectives of the rule. disproportionate effect on children. If The level at which an entity is The provisions of section 205 do not the regulatory action meets both criteria, considered small is determined for each apply when they are inconsistent with the Agency must evaluate the NAICS code by the Small Business applicable law. Moreover, section 205 environmental health or safety effects of Administration (SBA). allows EPA to adopt an alternative other the planned rule on children, and The Agency has examined the than the least costly, most cost-effective explain why the planned regulation is potential effects today’s final or least burdensome alternative if the preferable to other potentially effective determination may have on small Administrator publishes with the final and reasonably feasible alternatives entities, as required by the RFA/ rule an explanation why that alternative considered by the Agency. Today’s final SBREFA. We have determined that this was not adopted. determination is not subject to the action will not have a significant Before EPA establishes any regulatory Executive Order because it is not economic impact on a substantial requirements that may significantly or economically significant, as defined in number of small entities. This is uniquely affect small governments, Executive Order 12866. evidenced by the fact that today’s no-list including tribal governments, the action will result in zero to negligible Agency must develop a small 2. Executive Order 12898: incremental cost impacts. The only government agency plan, as required Environmental Justice potential impact associated with this under section 203 of UMRA. This plan Executive Order 12898, ‘‘Federal action may be the burden associated must provide for notifying potentially Actions to Address Environmental with reading and understanding the affected small governments, enabling Justice in Minority Populations and final determination. After considering officials of affected small governments Low-Income Population’’ (February 11, the economic impacts of today’s final to have meaningful and timely input in 1994), is designed to address the determination on small entities, I certify the development of EPA regulatory environmental and human health
VerDate 11
conditions of minority and low-income I. Were Federalism Implications this final determination, we are not populations. EPA is committed to Considered in Today’s Final required to prepare an Information addressing environmental justice Determination? Collection Request (ICR) in support of concerns and has assumed a leadership Executive Order 13132, entitled today’s action. role in environmental justice initiatives ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, VII. National Technology Transfer and to enhance environmental quality for all 1999), requires EPA to develop an Advancement Act of 1995 citizens of the United States. The accountable process to ensure Agency’s goals are to ensure that no ‘‘meaningful and timely input by State Section 12(d) of the National segment of the population, regardless of and local officials in the development of Technology Transfer and Advancement race, color, national origin, income, or regulatory policies that have federalism Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law net worth bears disproportionately high implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have 104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 and adverse human health and federalism implications’’ are defined in note) directs EPA to use voluntary environmental impacts as a result of the Executive Order to include consensus standards in its regulatory EPA’s policies, programs, and activities. regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct activities unless to do so would be In response to Executive Order 12898, effects on the States, on the relationship inconsistent with applicable law or and to concerns voiced by many groups between the national government and otherwise impractical. Voluntary outside the Agency, EPA’s Office of the States, or on the distribution of consensus standards are technical Solid Waste and Emergency Response power and responsibilities among the standards (e.g., materials specifications, (OSWER) formed an Environmental various levels of government.’’ test methods, sampling procedures, and Justice Task Force to analyze the array Today’s final determination does not business practices) that are developed or of environmental justice issues specific have federalism implications. It will not adopted by voluntary consensus to waste programs and to develop an have substantial direct effects on the standards bodies. The NTTAA directs overall strategy to identify and address States, on the relationship between the EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, these issues (OSWER Directive No. national government and the States, or explanations when the Agency decides 9200.3–17). We have no data indicating on the distribution of power and not to use available and applicable that today’s final determination would responsibilities among the various voluntary consensus standards. result in disproportionately negative levels of government, as specified in the This final determination does not impacts on minority or low income Order. Thus, Executive Order 13132 involve technical standards; thus, the communities. does not apply to this final requirements of section 12 (d) of the determination. H. What Consideration Was Given to National Technology Transfer and Tribal Governments? J. Were Energy Impacts Considered? Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. Executive Order 13175, entitled Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 272 note) do not apply. ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with Concerning Regulations That Affect VIII. The Congressional Review Act (5 Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ U.S.C. 801 et seq., as Added by the 67249, November 6, 2000), requires EPA (May 18, 2001), addresses the need for Small Business Regulatory Enforcement to develop an accountable process to regulatory actions to more fully consider Fairness Act of 1996) ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by the potential energy impacts of the tribal officials in the development of proposed rule and resulting actions. The Congressional Review Act, 5 regulatory policies that have tribal Under the Order, agencies are required U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal to prepare a Statement of Energy Effects Business Regulatory Enforcement implications’’ is defined in the when a regulatory action may have Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides Executive Order to include regulations significant adverse effects on energy that before a rule may take effect, the that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on supply, distribution, or use, including agency promulgating the rule must one or more Indian tribes, on the impacts on price and foreign supplies. submit a rule report, which includes a relationship between the Federal Additionally, the requirements obligate copy of the rule, to each House of the government and the Indian tribes, or on agencies to consider reasonable Congress and to the Comptroller General the distribution of power and alternatives to regulatory actions with of the United States. EPA submitted a responsibilities between the Federal adverse affects and the impacts the report containing this determination, government and Indian tribes.’’ alternatives might have upon energy and other required information to the Today’s final determination does not supply, distribution, or use. U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of have tribal implications. It will not have Today’s final determination is not Representatives, and the Comptroller substantial direct effects on tribal likely to have any significant adverse General of the United States prior to governments, on the relationship impact on factors affecting energy publication in the Federal Register. A between the Federal government and supply. We believe that Executive Order ‘‘major rule’’ cannot take effect until 60 Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 13211 is not relevant to this action. days after it is published in the Federal power and responsibilities between the VI. Paperwork Reduction Act Register. This action is not a ‘‘major Federal government and Indian tribes, rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). as specified in the Order. Today’s final This final determination does not determination will not significantly or impose an information collection Dated: March 28, 2002. uniquely affect the communities of burden under the provisions of the Christine Todd Whitman, Indian tribal governments, nor impose Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Administrator. substantial direct compliance costs on U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Because there are [FR Doc. 02–8153 Filed 4–3–02; 8:45 am] them. no paperwork requirements as part of BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate 11
Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 65 Thursday, April 4, 2002
CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING APRIL
Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Register General Information, indexes and other finding 202–523–5227 publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which aids lists parts and sections affected by documents published since Laws 523–5227 the revision date of each title. 5 CFR Proposed Rules: Presidential Documents 212...... 15344 Executive orders and proclamations 523–5227 410...... 15463 29 CFR The United States Government Manual 523–5227 550...... 15463 551...... 15463 1979...... 15454 Other Services 630...... 15463 523–3447 32 CFR Electronic and on-line services (voice) 7 CFR Privacy Act Compilation 523–3187 199...... 15721 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 523–6641 989...... 15707 1703...... 16011 33 CFR TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 523–5229 Proposed Rules: 117...... 16016 905...... 15339 165 ...... 15484, 15744, 16016 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 927...... 15747 Proposed Rules: 1205...... 15495 World Wide Web 147...... 15505 165...... 15507 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications 8 CFR is located at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara 286...... 15333 36 CFR Federal Register information and research tools, including Public Proposed Rules: 703...... 16018 Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access are located at: 286...... 15753 Proposed Rules: http://www.nara.gov/fedreg 1190...... 15509 9 CFR 1191...... 15509 E-mail 94...... 15334 113...... 15711 38 CFR FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is Ch. 1 ...... 16023 an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital Proposed Rules: Ch. III ...... 15501 form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form 39 CFR of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and 10 CFR 224...... 16023 PDF links to the full text of each document. Proposed Rules: 229...... 16023 To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select 710...... 16061 230...... 16024 Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list 824...... 15339 233...... 16023 (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 266...... 16023 12 CFR 273...... 16023 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail 264a...... 15335 service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. 40 CFR To subscribe, go to http://hydra.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html 13 CFR 52 ...... 15335, 15336, 16026 and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow Proposed Rules: 63...... 15486 the instructions. 121...... 16063 148...... 16262 180...... 15727, 16027 FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 14 CFR 261...... 16262 respond to specific inquiries. 39 ...... 15468, 15470, 15472, 268...... 16262 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 15473, 15475, 15476, 15714, 271...... 16262 Federal Register system to: [email protected] 15717, 16011 302...... 16262 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 71...... 15478, 15479 745...... 15489 regulations. 97...... 16013, 16014 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 52...... 15345 39 ...... 15755, 15758, 15760, 63 ...... 15510, 15674, 16154 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, APRIL 15762, 15763, 16064, 16067, 70...... 15767 16069 180...... 16073 15333–15462...... 1 71 ...... 15502, 15503, 15504 228...... 15348 15463–15706...... 2 15707–16010...... 3 16 CFR 44 CFR 16011–16284...... 4 Proposed Rules: 64...... 16030 310...... 15767 47 CFR 18 CFR 54...... 15490 Proposed Rules: 69...... 15490 Ch. 1 ...... 16071 73 ...... 15493, 15735, 15736 Proposed Rules: 19 CFR 73...... 15768, 15769 181...... 15480 48 CFR 21 CFR Proposed Rules: 173...... 15719 208...... 15351
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:19 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\04APCU.LOC pfrm07 PsN: 04APCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Reader Aids
216...... 15351 180...... 15736 175...... 15510 600...... 15338 229...... 16032 567...... 15769 660...... 15338 49 CFR 533...... 16052 571...... 15769 Proposed Rules: 171...... 15736 659...... 15725 574...... 15769 17...... 15856 172...... 15736 575...... 15769 173...... 15736 Proposed Rules: 600...... 15516 174...... 15736 171...... 15510 50 CFR 648...... 16079 176...... 15736 172...... 15510 17...... 15337 679...... 15517 178...... 15736 173...... 15510 229...... 15493
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:19 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\04APCU.LOC pfrm07 PsN: 04APCU Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Reader Aids iii
REMINDERS Sealed bid and negotiated Management and Lake Michigan, Sheboygan The items in this list were procurements; definitions; Administration, Director; County, WI; Wisconsin Air editorially compiled as an aid published 3-20-02 published 4-4-02 National Guard live fire to Federal Register users. Technical amendments; exercise area; comments Inclusion or exclusion from published 3-20-02 COMMENTS DUE NEXT due by 4-10-02; published this list has no legal LIBRARY OF CONGRESS WEEK 3-11-02 [FR 02-05655] significance. Disclosure or production of ENVIRONMENTAL records or information; AGRICULTURE PROTECTION AGENCY published 4-4-02 DEPARTMENT Air programs; approval and RULES GOING INTO Agricultural Marketing promulgation; State plans EFFECT APRIL 4, 2002 NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE Service for designated facilities and ADMINISTRATION Olives grown in— pollutants: AGRICULTURE California; comments due by Indiana; comments due by DEPARTMENT Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): 4-8-02; published 2-6-02 4-8-02; published 3-8-02 Agricultural Marketing [FR 02-02847] [FR 02-05598] Commercial items— Service AGRICULTURE Indiana; correction; Solicitation/contract/order Raisins produced from grapes DEPARTMENT comments due by 4-8-02; grown in— (SF 1449); published 3- published 3-15-02 [FR 20-02 Animal and Plant Health California; published 4-3-02 Inspection Service C2-05598] Contract action and Cervids; chronic wasting ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE DEPARTMENT contracting action; disease; indemnity PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Acquisition Regulation definitions; published 3- payments; comments due (FAR): 20-02 Air quality implementation by 4-9-02; published 2-8-02 plans; approval and Commercial items— Helium acquisition; [FR 02-03081] promulgation; various Solicitation/contract/order published 3-20-02 COMMERCE DEPARTMENT States: (SF 1449); published 3- HUBZone Program National Oceanic and California; comments due by 20-02 applicability; published 3- Atmospheric Administration 4-8-02; published 3-8-02 Contract action and 20-02 Endangered and threatened contracting action; [FR 02-05601] Labor clauses; application; species: definitions; published 3- published 3-20-02 ENVIRONMENTAL 20-02 Findings on petitions, etc.— PROTECTION AGENCY Procurement integrity Pacific salmonid ESUs; Helium acquisition; Clean Water Act: rewrite; published 3-20-02 delisting; comments due published 3-20-02 Recognition Awards Sealed bid and negotiated by 4-12-02; published Program; comments due HUBZone Program procurements; definitions; 2-11-02 [FR 02-03271] applicability; published 3- published 3-20-02 by 4-9-02; published 2-8- Fishery conservation and 02 [FR 02-03096] 20-02 Technical amendments; management: Labor clauses; application; published 3-20-02 Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY published 3-20-02 POSTAL SERVICE and South Atlantic Clean Water Act: Procurement integrity Organization, functions, and fisheries— rewrite; published 3-20-02 authority delegations: Gulf of Mexico shrimp; Recognition Awards Program; comments due Sealed bid and negotiated Inspector General; published comments due by 4-11- by 4-9-02; published 2-8- procurements; definitions; 4-4-02 02; published 2-25-02 published 3-20-02 [FR 02-04451] 02 [FR 02-03097] TRANSPORTATION Technical amendments; Magnuson-Stevens Act Hazardous waste: DEPARTMENT published 3-20-02 provisions— Identification and listing— Federal Aviation Domestic fisheries; FEDERAL HOUSING Administration Exclusions; comments due FINANCE BOARD exempted fishing permit by 4-12-02; published Airworthiness directives: Practice and procedure: applications; comments 2-26-02 [FR 02-04530] Eurocopter France; due by 4-10-02; Administrative enforcement State underground storage published 3-20-02 published 3-26-02 [FR activities; hearings on tank program approvals— 02-07133] record; published 3-5-02 TRANSPORTATION Nebraska; comments due DEPARTMENT DEFENSE DEPARTMENT GENERAL SERVICES by 4-8-02; published 3- Research and Special Civilian health and medical 7-02 [FR 02-05452] ADMINISTRATION program of the uniformed Programs Administration Pesticides; tolerances in food, Federal Acquisition Regulation services (CHAMPUS): Hazardous materials: animal feeds, and raw (FAR): TRICARE program— Commercial items— Hazardous materials agricultural commodities: transportation— Prime Remote program Solicitation/contract/order for active duty family Methyl parathion and ethyl Cargo tank motor (SF 1449); published 3- members; comments parathion; comments due vehicles; construction 20-02 due by 4-8-02; by 4-8-02; published 2-6- and maintenance 02 [FR 02-02513] Contract action and published 2-6-02 [FR requirements; correction; contracting action; 02-02676] Oxadixyl; comments due by published 2-1-02 4-8-02; published 2-6-02 definitions; published 3- DEFENSE DEPARTMENT VETERANS AFFAIRS [FR 02-02512] 20-02 Federal Acquisition Regulation DEPARTMENT Helium acquisition; (FAR): Toxic substances: published 3-20-02 Caribbean basin country Significant new uses— HUBZone Program RULES GOING INTO end products; comments Perfluoroalkyl sulfonates; applicability; published 3- EFFECT APRIL 4, 2002 due by 4-9-02; published comments due by 4-10- 20-02 2-8-02 [FR 02-02917] 02; published 3-11-02 Labor clauses; application; Organization, functions, and DEFENSE DEPARTMENT [FR 02-05747] published 3-20-02 authority delegations: Engineers Corps ENVIRONMENTAL Procurement integrity Board of Veterans Danger zones and restricted PROTECTION AGENCY rewrite; published 3-20-02 Appeals— areas: Water supply:
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:19 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\04APCU.LOC pfrm07 PsN: 04APCU iv Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Reader Aids
National primary drinking North Carolina; comments Unlikely features, events, comments due by 4-11- water regulations— due by 4-8-02; published and processes; 02; published 2-25-02 Public water systems; 3-11-02 [FR 02-05710] probability [FR 02-04411] unregulated contaminant Tennessee and Mississippi; specifications; Class D and Class E2 monitoring; reporting comments due by 4-8-02; comments due by 4-10- airspace; comments due by date establishment; published 3-27-02 [FR 02- 02; published 1-25-02 4-11-02; published 3-12-02 comments due by 4-11- 07190] [FR 02-01891] [FR 02-05877] 02; published 3-12-02 FEDERAL HOUSING POSTAL SERVICE Class E airspace; comments [FR 02-06016] FINANCE BOARD Domestic Mail Manual: due by 4-8-02; published 2- 21-02 [FR 02-04199] ENVIRONMENTAL Federal home loan bank Postal zones; determination Jet routes; comments due by PROTECTION AGENCY system: method; clarification; Water supply: comments due by 4-8-02; 4-12-02; published 2-26-02 Consolidated obligations; [FR 02-03127] National primary drinking non-mortgage assets; published 3-7-02 [FR 02- TRANSPORTATION water regulations— definition; comments due 05486] DEPARTMENT Public water systems; by 4-8-02; published 3-7- SMALL BUSINESS unregulated contaminant 02 [FR 02-05459] ADMINISTRATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration monitoring; reporting Finance Office Board of Hearings and Appeals Office Fuel economy standards: date establishment; Directors; minimum number proceedings: comments due by 4-11- of meetings; comments due Alternative fuel vehicles; Revision and clarification; automotive fuel economy 02; published 3-12-02 by 4-8-02; published 3-7-02 comments due by 4-11- [FR 02-06017] [FR 02-05469] manufacturing incentives; 02; published 3-12-02 [FR comments due by 4-10- FEDERAL FEDERAL RESERVE 02-05613] 02; published 3-11-02 [FR COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM TRANSPORTATION 02-05790] COMMISSION Home mortgage disclosure DEPARTMENT TRANSPORTATION Common carrier services: (Regulation C): Federal Aviation DEPARTMENT Federal-State Joint Board Miscellaneous amendments; Administration Research and Special on Universal Service— comments due by 4-12- Airworthiness directives: Programs Administration Carrier contributions to 02; published 2-15-02 [FR Boeing; comments due by Hazardous materials: universal service fund 02-03322] 4-12-02; published 2-26- Hazardous materials and manner in which GENERAL SERVICES 02 [FR 02-04506] transportation— costs are recovered ADMINISTRATION from customers; Eurocopter France; Intermodal portable tanks Federal Acquisition Regulation comments due by 4-12- comments due by 4-8-02; on transport vehicles; (FAR): 02; published 3-13-02 published 2-6-02 [FR 02- unloading; comments [FR 02-06029] Caribbean basin country 02426] due by 4-8-02; published 2-22-02 [FR end products; comments TRANSPORTATION Non-rural high-cost 02-04284] support mechanism; due by 4-9-02; published DEPARTMENT 2-8-02 [FR 02-02917] TREASURY DEPARTMENT comprehensive review; Federal Aviation comments due by 4-10- INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Administration Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Bureau 02; published 3-11-02 Surface Mining Reclamation Airworthiness directives: [FR 02-05675] and Enforcement Office Alcohol; viticultural area Eurocopter France; designations: Non-rural high-cost Permanent program and comments due by 4-12- Yadkin Valley, NC; support mechanism; abandoned mine land 02; published 2-11-02 [FR comments due by 4-8-02; comprehensive review; reclamation plan 02-02424] comments due by 4-10- submissions: published 2-7-02 [FR 02- TRANSPORTATION 02956] 02; published 3-11-02 West Virginia; comments [FR 02-05676] DEPARTMENT TREASURY DEPARTMENT due by 4-9-02; published Federal Aviation Incumbent local exchange 3-25-02 [FR 02-07088] Customs Service carriers— Administration Articles conditionally free, NATIONAL AERONAUTICS Airworthiness directives: subject to a reduced rate, Accounting and ARMIS AND SPACE Turbomeca S.A.; comments etc.: reporting requirements; ADMINISTRATION comprehensive review; due by 4-12-02; published Prototypes used solely for 2000 biennial regulatory Federal Acquisition Regulation 2-11-02 [FR 02-03160] product development, (FAR): review (Phase 2); Airworthiness standards: testing, evaluation, or Caribbean basin country comments due by 4-8- Special conditions— quality control purposes; 02; published 2-6-02 end products; comments comments due by 4-8-02; Eclipse Aviation Corp. [FR 02-01213] due by 4-9-02; published published 3-8-02 [FR 02- 2-8-02 [FR 02-02917] Model 500 airplane; 05557] Digital television stations; table comments due by 4-10- of assignments: NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND 02; published 3-11-02 TREASURY DEPARTMENT Illinois; comments due by 4- RECORDS ADMINISTRATION [FR 02-05811] Foreign Assets Control Office 8-02; published 3-1-02 National Historical Publications Eclipse Aviation Corp. [FR 02-04883] and Records Commission; Model 500 airplane; Sanctions regulations, etc.: Ohio; comments due by 4- grant regulations; plain comments due by 4-12- Sierra Leone and Liberia; 8-02; published 2-27-02 language usage; comments 02; published 3-13-02 rough diamonds sanctions [FR 02-04578] due by 4-8-02; published 2- [FR 02-05808] regulations; comments 6-02 [FR 02-02758] Practice and procedure: Extra Flugzeugbau GmbH due by 4-8-02; published 2-6-02 [FR 02-02763] Truthful statements; NUCLEAR REGULATORY Model EA-400 airplane; comments due by 4-8-02; COMMISSION comments due by 4-11- published 3-8-02 [FR 02- Radioactive wastes; high-level; 02; published 3-12-02 LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS 05382] disposal in geologic [FR 02-05810] Radio stations; table of repositories: Fairchild Dornier GmbH This is a continuing list of assignments: Yucca Mountain, NV— Model 728-100 airplane; public bills from the current
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:19 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\04APCU.LOC pfrm07 PsN: 04APCU Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 65 / Thursday, April 4, 2002 / Reader Aids v
session of Congress which U.S. Government Printing S. 2019/P.L. 107–156 subscribe, go to http:// have become Federal laws. It Office, Washington, DC 20402 To extend the authority of the hydra.gsa.gov/archives/ may be used in conjunction (phone, 202–512–1808). The Export-Import Bank until April publaws-l.html or send E-mail with ‘‘PLUS’’ (Public Laws text will also be made 30, 2002. (Mar. 31, 2002; 116 to [email protected] Update Service) on 202–523– available on the Internet from Stat. 117) with the following text 6641. This list is also GPO Access at http:// Last List March 27, 2002 message: available online at http:// www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ SUBSCRIBE PUBLAWS-L www.nara.gov/fedreg/ nara005.html. Some laws may Your Name. plawcurr.html. not yet be available. Public Laws Electronic Notification Service Note: This service is strictly The text of laws is not (PENS) for E-mail notification of new published in the Federal H.R. 2356/P.L. 107–155 laws. The text of laws is not Register but may be ordered available through this service. in ‘‘slip law’’ (individual Bipartisan Campaign Reform PENS is a free electronic mail PENS cannot respond to pamphlet) form from the Act of 2002 (Mar. 27, 2002; notification service of newly specific inquiries sent to this Superintendent of Documents, 116 Stat. 81) enacted public laws. To address.
VerDate 11-MAY-2000 21:19 Apr 03, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\04APCU.LOC pfrm07 PsN: 04APCU