issue-1996-04-25•Federal Register final rules — 1996-04-25
Federal Register final rules — 1996-04-25
issue-1996-04-25Federal Register final rules — 1996-04-25Regulation
Published Federal Register documents, not public-inspection drafts. The GPO XML/text rendition is a research aid; the linked complete official PDF retains the printed layout and all graphics. Graphics are retained in that PDF and are not independently reproduced in this text rendition. Publication does not establish that every provision remains legally in force.
FR Doc. 96-9995 Large Multiple-tube Fireworks Devices; Correction
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 18245]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9995]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
16 CFR Parts 1500 and 1507
Large Multiple-tube Fireworks Devices; Correction
AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).
ACTION: Final rule; correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: CPSC is correcting errors in its amendment to the fireworks
regulations under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act that appeared in
the Federal Register on March 26, 1996 (61 FR 13084). Those amendments
will require that large multiple-tube fireworks devices that have any
tube with an inner diameter of 1.5 inches (3.8 cm) or greater not tip
over when inclined at an angle of 60 degrees from the horizontal.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 26, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Samuel B. Hall, Office of Compliance,
Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, DC 20207-0001;
telephone (301) 504-0400, ext. 1371.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 26, 1996, the CPSC published an
amendment to the fireworks regulations under the Federal Hazardous
Substances Act (61 FR 13084). Those amendments will require that large
multiple-tube fireworks devices that have any tube with an inner
diameter of 1.5 inches (3.8 cm) or greater not tip over when inclined
at an angle of 60 degrees from the horizontal. This requirement is
intended to reduce the risk of injury posed when these fireworks
devices tip over during firing. If they tip over, subsequent tubes may
discharge in the direction of spectators or others in the vicinity. The
amendment will become effective March 26, 1997.
The errors occur in new paragraph 16 CFR 1500.17(a)(12(i), at page
13095 of the Federal Register document of March 26, 1996. One of the
errors correctly stated that the requirement would apply to the subject
devices that first enter commerce or are imported on or after the date
that is 1 year after publication. However, that paragraph should
instead have stated the actual date (March 26, 1997).
The second error is that the reference to the minimum tip angle as
``greater than 60 degrees'' should have read ``less than 60 degrees''.
Accordingly, the following correction is made in the listing of
banned hazardous substances at 16 CFR 1500.17(a)(12)(i) published in
the Federal Register on March 26, 1996 (61 FR 13084):
1. Section 1500.17(a)(12)(i) on page 13095, column 3, is correctly
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 1500.17 Banned hazardous substances
(a) * * *
(12)(i) Large multiple-tube devices. Multiple-tube mine and shell
fireworks devices that first enter commerce or are imported on or after
March 26, 1997, that have any tube measuring 1.5 inches (3.8 cm) or
more in inner diameter, and that have a minimum tip angle less than 60
degrees when tested in accordance with the procedure of Sec. 1507.12 of
this part.
* * * * *
Dated: April 17, 1996.
Sadye E. Dunn,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission.
[FR Doc. 96-9995 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-9834 Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Addition of Method 29 to Appendix A of Part 60 and Amendments to Method 101A of Appendix B of Part 61
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18260-18280]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9834]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 60 and 61
[AD-FRL 5407-4]
Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Addition of Method 29
to Appendix A of Part 60 and Amendments to Method 101A of Appendix B of
Part 61
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule adds Method 29, ``Determination of Metals Emissions
from Stationary Sources,'' to Appendix A of Part 60, and makes
amendments to Method 101A of Appendix B of Part 61. Method 29 is being
added so that it can be used to determine cadmium, lead, and mercury
emissions from municipal waste combustors (MWC) under subpart Ea of
part 60. The amendments to Method 101A of appendix B of part 61 are to
expand that method's applicability, and to revise procedures for
handling and analyzing samples collected by the sampling train.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 25, 1996.
Incorporation by Reference. The incorporation by reference of
certain publications listed in the regulation is approved by the
Director of the Office of the Federal Register April 25, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket No. A-94-28, containing materials relevant to
this rulemaking, is available for public inspection and copying between
8:30 a.m. and Noon, and 1:30 and 3:30 p.m.,
[[Page 18261]]
Monday through Friday, at EPA's Air And Docket Section, Room M1500,
First Floor, Waterside Mall, Gallery 1, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington,
D.C. 20460. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William Grimley at (919) 541-1065, Source Characterization Group B (MD-
19), Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. The Rulemaking
Under Subparts Ca and Ea, the EPA promulgated guidelines and
standards to regulate mercury, cadmium, and lead emissions from MWC's
which were published in the Federal Register on December 19, 1995 (see
60 FR 65382). Method 29 is being promulgated for addition to Appendix A
of 40 CFR Part 60 and will serve as the compliance test method for
mercury, cadmium, and lead. Amendments to Method 101A of Appendix B of
Part 61 are being promulgated to provide consistency with Method 29.
These regulations were proposed on September 20, 1994 (see 59 FR
48259).
II. Public Participation
The opportunity to hold a public hearing on October 20, 1994 at 10
a.m. was present in the proposal notice, but no one wanted to make an
oral presentation. The public comment period was from September 21,
1994 to November 21, 1994.
III. Significant Comments and Changes to the Proposed Rulemaking
One comment letter was received from the proposed rulemaking. The
comments and responses are summarized in this preamble.
The first comment dealt with the analytical detection limits stated
in Method 29. The commenter believes the detection limits are
unrealistically low, and represent values achievable only under ideal
conditions. The commenter concludes by saying that the method should
state that it is the analyst's responsibility to determine the actual
detection limit achieved.
The detection limits stated in Method 29 are those listed in the
SW-846 methods manual, and EPA believes they are reasonable ones for
use in this application of SW-846 analytical methods. However, Method
29 as proposed is clear in its discussion of the application of quality
assurance procedures to document the quality of the data actually
produced, and is also clear in the description of the procedure to be
used to establish the actual detection limits achieved during the
measurement of emissions.
The second comment addressed the point that dilution is likely to
be effective in avoiding the analytical problem of spectral
interference only if the analyte is present at a much greater
concentration than the interferant. The commenter then suggests that
Method 29 be revised to say that the effective way to adjust for
spectral interference is by making background corrections or overlap
corrections.
The EPA agrees with this comment, and Section 2.5 of the Method has
been revised to permit these corrective techniques.
The third comment addressed the use of an alumina torch in the
inductively coupled argon plasma (ICAP) emission spectroscopy
procedure. The commenter believes that few ICAP users have this
capability, and that an alternative technique for dealing with hydrogen
fluoride could be suggested in the Method.
The EPA notes that the use of an alumina torch in this procedure
has been described in related methodology for several years and is
commercially available and is in use by many analysts. The alternative
procedure suggested in the comment may be suitable if the detection
limits needed in the particular emission measurement situation can be
met.
The fourth comment addressed the required purity of the nickel
nitrate used to produce the nickel nitrate matrix modifier. The
commenter suggests that commercial nickel nitrate may contain small
amounts of impurities.
The EPA is not aware of instances where commercial nickel nitrate
that would be purchased for this purpose would contain objectionable
amounts of impurities, however the Method has been revised to permit
other nickel compounds of suitable purity to be used.
The fifth and final comment made a general statement concerning the
length and complexity of the Method, with the commenter suggesting that
the EPA should attempt to streamline and simplify the Method in order
to make it less costly and easier to use.
The EPA recognizes the need to simplify methods to reduce costs,
and believes that to meet the needed quality of the data to be
generated by Method 29, that the best possible effort has been made.
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
The docket is an organized and complete file of all the information
submitted to or otherwise considered by the EPA in the development of
this final rulemaking. The principal purposes of the docket are: (1) to
allow interested parties to identify and locate documents so that they
can effectively participate in the rulemaking process, and (2) to serve
as the record in case of judicial review (except for interagency review
materials) [Section 307(d)(7)(A)].
B. Office of Management and Budget Review
1. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain any information collection requirements
subject to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review under the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
2. Executive Order 12866 Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the EPA
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and
therefore subject to the OMB review and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant'' regulatory action as
one that is likely to lead to a rule that may:
1. Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities;
2. Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
3. Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
users fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or
4. Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, the EPA does not
consider this action to be significant because it does not involve any
of the above mentioned items.
D. Unfunded Mandates Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``Unfunded
Mandates Act'') (signed into law on March 22, 1995) requires that the
Agency prepare a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule
that includes a Federal mandate
[[Page 18262]]
that may result in expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments,
in aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any
one year. Section 204 requires the Agency to establish a plan for
obtaining input from and informing, educating, and advising any small
governments that may be significantly or uniquely affected by the rule.
Under section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act, the Agency must
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
before promulgating a rule for which a budgetary impact statement must
be prepared. The agency must select from those alternatives the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule, unless the Agency explains why
this alternative is not selected or the selection of this alternative
is inconsistent with law.
Because this rule is estimated to result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments or the private sector of less than
$100 million in any one year, the Agency has not prepared a budgetary
impact statement or specifically addressed the selection of the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative. Because
small governments will not be significantly or uniquely affected by
this rule, the Agency is not required to develop a plan with regard to
small governments.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act Compliance
Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., I hereby
certify that this final rule will not have an economic impact on small
entities because no additional costs will be incurred.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 60 and 61
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Arsenic, Asbestos,
Beryllium, Cadmium, Lead, Hazardous materials, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Mercury, Municipal waste
combustors, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sewage sludge
incineration.
Statutory Authority. The statutory authority for this final rule
is provided by sections 101, 111, 112, 114, 116, 129, and 301 of the
Clean Air Act, as amended; 42 U.S.C., 7401, 7411, 7412, 7414, 7416,
7429, and 7601.
Dated: January 18, 1996.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
40 CFR parts 60 and 61 are amended as follows:
PART 60--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7412, 7414, 7416, and 7601.
2. Section 60.17 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(22) and by
adding paragraphs (i) and (j) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.17 Incorporations by reference.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(22) ASTM D 1193-77, Standard Specification for Reagent Water,
for appendix A to part 60, Method 6, par. 3.1.1; Method 7, par.
3.2.2; Method 7C, par. 3.1.1; Method 7D, par. 3.1.1; Method 8, par.
3.1.3; Method 12, par. 4.1.3; Method 25D, par. 3.2.2.4; Method 26A,
par. 3.1.1; Method 29, pars. 4.2.2., 4.4.2., and 4.5.6.
* * * * *
(i) Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical
Methods,'' EPA Publication SW-846 Third Edition (November 1986), as
amended by Updates I (July, 1992), II (September 1994), IIA (August,
1993), and IIB (January, 1995). Test Method are incorporated by
reference for appendix A to part 60, Method 29, pars. 2.2.1; 2.3.1;
2.5; 3.3.12.1; 3.3.12.2; 3.3.13; 3.3.14; 5.4.3; 6.2; 6.3; 7.2.1; 7.2.3;
and Table 29-2. The Third Edition of SW-846 and Updates I, II, IIA, and
IIB (document number 955-001-00000-1) are available from the
Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, DC 20402, (202) 512-1800. Copies may be obtained from the
Library of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
(j) Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater,
16th edition, 1985. Method 303F Determination of Mercury by the Cold
Vapor Technique. This document may be obtained from the American Public
Health Association, 1015 18th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036, and is
incorporated by reference for Method 29, pars 5.4.3; 6.3; and 7.2.3 of
appendix A to part 60.
3. In part 60, by adding method 29 to appendix A to read as
follows:
Appendix A--Test Methods
* * * * *
Method 29--Determination of Metals Emissions from Stationary
Sources
1. Applicability and Principle
1.1 Applicability. This method is applicable to the
determination of antimony (Sb), arsenic (As), barium (Ba), beryllium
(Be), cadmium (Cd), chromium (Cr), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), lead
(Pb), manganese (Mn), mercury (Hg), nickel (Ni), phosphorus (P),
selenium (Se), silver (Ag), thallium (T1), and zinc (Zn) emissions
from stationary sources. This method may be used to determine
particulate emissions in addition to the metals emissions if the
prescribed procedures and precautions are followed.
1.1.1 Hg emissions can be measured, alternatively, using EPA
Method 101A of Appendix B, 40 CFR Part 61. Method 101-A measures
only Hg but it can be of special interest to sources which need to
measure both Hg and Mn emissions.
1.2 Principle. A stack sample is withdrawn isokinetically from
the source, particulate emissions are collected in the probe and on
a heated filter, and gaseous emissions are then collected in an
aqueous acidic solution of hydrogen peroxide (analyzed for all
metals including Hg) and an aqueous acidic solution of potassium
permanganate (analyzed only for Hg). The recovered samples are
digested, and appropriate fractions are analyzed for Hg by cold
vapor atomic absorption spectroscopy (CVAAS) and for Sb, As, Ba, Be,
Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, Pb, Mn, Ni, P, Se, Ag, Tl, and Zn by inductively
coupled argon plasma emission spectroscopy (ICAP) or atomic
absorption spectroscopy (AAS). Graphite furnace atomic absorption
spectroscopy (GFAAS) is used for analysis of Sb, As, Cd, Co, Pb, Se,
and Tl if these elements require greater analytical sensitivity than
can be obtained by ICAP. If one so chooses, AAS may be used for
analysis of all listed metals if the resulting in-stack method
detection limits meet the goal of the testing program. Similarly,
inductively coupled plasma-mass spectroscopy (ICP-MS) may be used
for analysis of Sb, As, Ba, Be, Cd, Cr, Co, Cu, Pb, Mn, Ni, As, Tl
and Zn.
2. Range, Detection Limits, Precision, and Interferences
2.1 Range. For the analysis described and for similar analyses,
the ICAP response is linear over several orders of magnitude.
Samples containing metal concentrations in the nanograms per ml (ng/
ml) to micrograms per ml (g/ml) range in the final
analytical solution can be analyzed using this method. Samples
containing greater than approximately 50 g/ml As, Cr, or Pb
should be diluted to that level or lower for final analysis. Samples
containing greater than approximately 20 g/ml of Cd should
be diluted to that level before analysis.
2.2 Analytical Detection Limits. (Note: See section 2.3 for the
description of in-stack detection limits.)
2.2.1 ICAP analytical detection limits for the sample solutions
(based on Method 6010 in EPA Publication SW-846, Third Edition
(November 1986) including updates I, II, IIA, and IIB, as
incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17(i)) are approximately as
follows: Sb (32 ng/ml), As (53 ng/ml), Ba (2 ng/ml), Be (0.3 ng/ml),
Cd (4 ng/ml), Cr (7 ng/ml), Co (7 ng/ml), Cu (6 ng/ml), Pb (42 ng/
ml), Mn (2 ng/ml), Ni (15 ng/ml), P (75 ng/ml), Se (75 ng/ml), Ag (7
ng/ml), Tl (40 ng/ml), and Zn (2 ng/ml). ICP-MS analytical detection
limits (based on based on Method 6020 in EPA Publication SW-846,
Third Edition (November 1986) as incorporated by reference in
Sec. 60.17(i)) are lower generally by a factor of ten or more. Be is
lower by a factor
[[Page 18263]]
of three. The actual sample analytical detection limits are sample
dependent and may vary due to the sample matrix.
2.2.2 The analytical detection limits for analysis by direct
aspiration AAS are approximately as follow: Sb (200 ng/ml), As (2
ng/ml), Ba (100 ng/ml), Be (5 ng/ml), Cd (5 ng/ml), Cr (50 ng/ml),
Co (50 ng/ml), Cu (20 ng/ml), Pb (100 ng/ml), Mn (10 ng/ml), Ni (40
ng/ml), Se (2 ng/ml), Ag (10 ng/ml), Tl (100 ng/ml), and Zn (5 ng/
ml).
2.2.3 The detection limit for Hg by CVAAS (on the resultant
volume of the disgestion of the aliquots taken for Hg analyses) can
be approximately 0.02 to 0.2ng/ml, depending upon the type of CVAAS
analytical instrument used.
2.2.4 The use of GFAAS can enhance the detection limits
compared to direct aspiration AAS as follows: Sb (3 ng/ml), As (1
ng/ml), Be (0.2 ng/ml), Cd (0.1 ng/ml), Cr (1 ng/ml), Co (1 ng/ml),
Pb (1 ng/ml), Se (2 ng/ml), and T1 (ng/ml).
2.3 In-stack Detection Limits.
2.3.1 For test planning purposes in-stack detection limits can
be developed by using the following information (1) the procedures
described in this method, (2) the analytical detection limits
described in Section 2.2 and in EPA Publication SW-846, Third
Edition (November 1986) including updates I, II, IIA and IIB, as
incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17(i), (3) the normal volumes
of 300 ml (Analytical Fraction 1) for the front-half and 150 ml
(Analytical Fraction 2A) for the back-half samples, and (4) a stack
gas sample volume of 1.25 m\3\. The resultant in-stack method
detection limits for the above set of conditions are presented in
Table 29-1 and were calculated by using Eq. 29-1.
A x B/C=D Eq. 29-1
Where:
A=Analytical detectin limit, g/ml.
B=Liquid volume of digested sample prior to aliquotting for
analysis, Ml.
C=Stack sample gas volume, dsm\3\.
D=In-stack detection limit, g/m\3\.
Table 29-1.--In-Stack Method Detection Limits (g/m \3\) for the Front-Half, the Back-Half, and the Total Sampling Train Using ICAP and AAS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Front-half: Probe and
Metal filter Back-half: Impingers 1-3 Back-half: Impingers (4-6) Total train:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------a------------------------------------------
Antimony............................ \1\ 7.7 (0.7) \1\ 3.8 (0.4) ........................... \1\ 11.5 (1.1)
Arsenic............................. \1\ 12.7 (0.3) \1\ 6.4 (0.1) ........................... \1\ 19.1 (0.4)
Barium.............................. 0.5 0.3 ........................... 0.8
Beryllium........................... \1\ 0.07 (0.05) \1\ 0.04 (0.03) ........................... \1\ 0.11 (0.08)
Cadmium............................. \1\ 1.0 (0.02) \1\ 0.5 (0.01) ........................... \1\ 1.5 (0.03)
Chromium............................ \1\ 1.7 (0.2) \1\ 0.8 (0.1) ........................... \1\ 2.5 (0.3)
Cobalt.............................. \1\ 1.7 (0.2) \1\ 0.8 (0.1) ........................... \1\ 2.5 (0.3)
Copper.............................. 1.4 0.7 ........................... 2.1
Lead................................ \1\ 10.1 (0.2) \1\ 5.0 (0.1) ........................... \1\ 15.1 (0.3)
Manganese........................... \1\ 0.5 (0.2) \1\ 0.2 (0.1) ........................... \1\ 0.7 (0.3)
Mercury............................. \2\ 0.06 \2\ 0.3 \2\ 0.2 \2\ 0.56
Nickel.............................. 3.6 1.8 ........................... 5.4
Phosphorus.......................... 18 9 ........................... 27
Selenium............................ \1\ 18 (0.5) \1\ 9 (0.3) ........................... \1\ 27 (0.8)
Silver.............................. 1.7 0.9 ........................... 2.6
Thallium............................ \1\ 9.6 (0.2) \1\ 4.8 (0.1) ........................... \1\ 14.4 (0.3)
Zinc................................ 0.5 0.3 ........................... 0.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Mercury analysis only.
\1\ Detection limit when analyzed by GFAAS.
\2\ Detection limit when analyzed by CVAAS, estimated for Back-Half and Total Train. See Sections 2.2 and 5.4.3.
Note: Actual method in-stack detection limits may vary from these values, as described in Section 2.3.3.
2.3.2 To ensure optimum precision/resolution in the analyses,
the target concentrations of metals in the analytical solutions
should be at least ten times their respective analytical detection
limits. Under certain conditions, and with greater care in the
analytical procedure, these concentrations can be as low as
approximately three times the respective analytical detection limits
without seriously impairing the precision of the analyses. On at
least one sample run in the source test, and for each metal
analyzed, perform either repetitive analyses, Method of Standard
Additions, serial dilution, or matrix spike addition, etc., to
document the quality of the data.
2.3.3 Actual in-stack method detection limits are based on
actual source sampling parameters and analytical results as
described above. If required, the method in-stack detection limits
can be improved over those shown in Table 29-1 for a specific test
by either increasing the sampled stack gas volume, reducing the
total volume of the digested samples, improving the analytical
detection limits, or any combination of the three. For extremely low
levels of Hg only, the aliquot size selected for digestion and
analysis can be increased to as much as 10 ml, thus improving the
in-stack detection limit by a factor of ten compared to a 1 ml
aliquot size.
2.3.3.1 A nominal one hour sampling run will collect a stack
gas sampling volume of about 1.25 m3. If the sampling time is
increased to four hours and 5 m3 are collected, the in-stack
method detection limits would be improved by a factor of four
compared to the values shown in Table 29-1.
2.3.3.2 The in-stack detection limits assume that all of the
sample is digested and the final liquid volumes for analysis are the
normal values of 300 ml for Analytical Fraction 1, and 150 ml for
Analytical Fraction 2A. If the volume of Analytical Fraction 1 is
reduced from 300 to 30 ml, the in-stack detection limits for that
fraction of the sample would be improved by a factor of ten. If the
volume of Analytical Fraction 2A is reduced from 150 to 25 ml, the
in-stack detection limits for that fraction of the sample would be
improved by a factor of six. Matrix effect checks are necessary on
sample analyses and typically are of much greater significance for
samples that have been concentrated to less than the normal original
sample volume. Reduction of Analytical Fractions 1 and 2A to volumes
of less than 30 and 25 ml, respectively, could interfere with the
redissolving of the residue and could increase interference by other
compounds to an intolerable level.
2.3.3.3 When both of the modifications described in Sections
2.3.3.1 and 2.3.3.2 are used simultaneously on one sample, the
resultant improvements are multiplicative. For example, an increase
in stack gas volume by a factor of four and a reduction in the total
liquid sample digested volume of both Analytical Fractions 1 and 2A
by a factor of six would result in an improvement by a factor of
twenty-four of the in-stack method detection limit.
2.4 Precision. The precision (relative standard deviation) for
each metal detected in a method development test performed at
[[Page 18264]]
a sewage sludge incinerator were found to be as follows: Sb (12.7
percent), As (13.5 percent), Ba (20.6 percent), Cd (11.5 percent),
Cr (11.2 percent), Cu (11.5 percent), Pb (11.6 percent), P (14.6
percent), Se (15.3 percent), Tl (12.3 percent), and Zn (11.8
percent). The precision for Ni was 7.7 percent for another test
conducted at a source simulator. Be, Mn, and Ag were not detected in
the tests. However, based on the analytical detection limits of the
ICAP for these metals, their precisions could be similar to those
for the other metals when detected at similar levels.
2.5 Interferences. Iron (Fe) can be a spectral interference
during the analysis of As, Cr, and Cd by ICAP. Aluminum (Al) can be
a spectral interference during the analysis of As and Pb by ICAP.
Generally, these interferences can be reduced by diluting the
analytical sample, but such dilution raises the in-stack detection
limits. Background and overlap corrections may be used to adjust for
spectral interferences. Refer to Method 6010 in EPA Publication SW-
846 Third Edition (November 1986) including updates I, II, IIA and
IIB, as incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17(i) the other
analytical methods used for details on potential interferences to
this method. For all GFAAS analyses, use matrix modifiers to limit
interferences, and matrix match all standards.
3. Apparatus
3.1 Sampling. A schematic of the sampling train is shown in
Figure 29-1. It has general similarities to the Method 5 train.
BILLING 6560-50-M
[[Page 18265]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP96.000
BILLING 6560-50-C
[[Page 18266]]
3.1.1 Probe Nozzle (Probe Tip) and Borosilicate or Quartz Glass
Probe Liner. Same as Method 5, Sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2, except that
glass nozzles are required unless alternate tips are constructed of
materials that are free from contamination and will not interfere
with the sample. If a probe tip other than glass is used, no
correction to the sample test results to compensate for the nozzle's
effect on the sample is allowed. Probe fittings of plastic such as
Teflon, polypropylene, etc. are recommended instead of metal
fittings to prevent contamination. If one chooses to do so, a single
glass piece consisting of a combined probe tip and probe liner may
be used.
3.1.2 Pitot Tube and Differential Pressure Gauge. Same as
Method 2, Sections 2.1 and 2.2, respectively.
3.1.3 Filter Holder. Glass, same as Method 5, Section 2.1.5,
except use a Teflon filter support or other non-metallic, non-
contaminating support in place of the glass frit.
3.1.4 Filter Heating System. Same as Method 5, Section 2.1.6.
3.1.5 Condenser. Use the following system for condensing and
collecting gaseous metals and determining the moisture content of
the stack gas. The condensing system shall consist of four to seven
impingers connected in series with leak-free ground glass fittings
or other leak-free, non-contaminating fittings. Use the first
impinger as a moisture trap. The second impinger (which is the first
HNO3/H2O2 impinger) shall be identical to the first
impinger in Method 5. The third impinger (which is the second
HNO3/H2O2 impinger) shall be a Greenburg Smith
impinger with the standard tip as described for the second impinger
in Method 5, Section 2.1.7. The fourth (empty) impinger and the
fifth and sixth (both acidified KMnO4) impingers are the same
as the first impinger in Method 5. Place a thermometer capable of
measuring to within 1 deg.C (2 deg.F) at the outlet of the last
impinger. If no Hg analysis is planned, then the fourth, fifth, and
sixth impingers are not used.
3.1.6 Metering System, Barometer, and Gas Density Determination
Equipment. Same as Method 5, Sections 2.1.8 through 2.1.10,
respectively.
3.1.7 Teflon Tape. For capping openings and sealing
connections, if necessary, on the sampling train.
3.2. Sample Recovery. Same as Method 5, Sections 2.2.1 through
2.2.8 (Probe-Liner and Probe-Nozzle Brushes or Swabs, Wash Bottles,
Sample Storage Containers, Petri Dishes, Glass Graduated Cylinder,
Plastic Storage Containers, Funnel and Rubber Policeman, and Glass
Funnel), respectively, with the following exceptions and additions:
3.2.1 Non-metallic Probe-Liner and Probe-Nozzle Brushes or
Swabs. Use non-metallic probe-liner and probe-nozzle brushes or
swabs for quantitative recovery of materials collected in the front-
half of the sampling train.
3.2.2 Sample Storage Containers. Use glass bottles (see the
Precaution: in Section 4.3.2 of this Method) with Teflon-lined caps
that are non-reactive to the oxidizing solutions, with capacities of
1000- and 500-ml, for storage of acidified KMnO4- containing
samples and blanks. Glass or polyethylene bottles may be used for
other sample types.
3.2.3 Graduated Cylinder. Glass or equivalent.
3.2.4 Funnel. Glass or equivalent.
3.2.5 Labels. For identifying samples.
3.2.6 Polypropylene Tweezers and/or Plastic Gloves. For
recovery of the filter from the sampling train filter holder.
3.3 Sample Preparation and Analysis.
3.3.1 Volumetric Flasks, 100-ml, 250-ml, and 100-ml. For
preparation of standards and sample dilutions.
3.3.2 Graduated Cylinders. For preparation of reagents.
3.3.3 ParrR Bombs or Microwave Pressure Relief Vessels
with Capping Station (CEM Corporation model or equivalent). For
sample digestion.
3.3.4 Beakers and Watch Glasses. 250-ml beakers, with watch
glass covers, for sample digestion.
3.3.5 Ring Stands and Clamps. For securing equipment such as
filtration apparatus.
3.3.6 Filter Funnels. For holding filter paper.
3.3.7 Disposable Pasteur Pipets and Bulbs.
3.3.8 Volumetric Pipets.
3.3.9 Analytical Balance. Accurate to within .01 mg.
3.3.10 Microwave or Conventional Oven. For heating samples at
fixed power levels or temperatures, respectively.
3.3.11 Hot Plates.
3.3.12 Atomic Absorption Spectrometer (AAS). Equipped with a
background corrector.
3.3.12.1 Graphite Furnace Attachment. With Sb, As, Cd, Co, Pb,
Se, and Tl hollow cathode lamps (HCLs) or electrodeless discharge
lamps (EDLs). Same as Methods 7041 (Sb), 7060 (As), 7131 (Cd), 7201
(Co), 7421 (Pb), 7740 (Se), and 7841 (Tl) in EPA publication SW-846
Third Edition (November 1986) including updates I, II, IIA and IIB,
as incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17(i).
3.3.12.2 Cold Vapor Mercury Attachment. With a mercury HCL or
EDL, an air recirculation pump, a quartz cell, an aerator apparatus,
and a heat lamp or desiccator tube. The heat lamp shall be capable
of raising the temperature at the quartz cell by 10 deg.C above
ambient, so that no condensation forms on the wall of the quartz
cell. Same as Method 6020 in EPA publication SW-846 Third Edition
(November 1986) including updates I, II, IIA and IIB, as
incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17(i). See Note No. 2: Section
5.4.3 for other acceptable approaches for analysis of Hg in which
analytical detection limits of 0.002 ng/ml were obtained.
3.3.13 Inductively Coupled Argon Plasma Spectrometer. With
either a direct or sequential reader and an alumina torch. Same as
EPA Method 6010 in EPA publication SW-846 Third Edition (November
1986) including updates I, II, IIA and IIB, as incorporated by
reference in Sec. 60.17(i).
3.3.14 Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometer. Same as
EPA Method 6020 in EPA publication SW-846 Third Edition (November
1986) including updates I, II, IIA and IIB, as incorporated by
reference in Sec. 60.17(i).
4. Reagents
4.1 Unless otherwise indicated, it is intended that all
reagents conform to the specifications established by the Committee
on Analytical Reagents of the American Chemical Society, where such
specifications are available. Otherwise, use the best available
grade.
4.2 Sampling Reagents.
4.2.1 Sample Filters. Without organic binders. The filters
shall contain less than 1.3 g/in.2 of each of the
metals to be measured. Analytical results provided by filter
manufacturers stating metals content of the filters are acceptable.
However, if no such results are available, analyze filter blanks for
each target metal prior to emission testing. Quartz fiber filters
meeting these requirements are recommended. However, if glass fiber
filters become available which meet these requirements, they may be
used. Filter efficiencies and unreactiveness to sulfur dioxide
(SO2) or sulfur trioxide (SO3) shall be as described in
Section 3.1.1 of Method 5.
4.2.2 Water. To conform to ASTM Specification D1193-77, Type II
(incorporated by reference--See Sec. 60.17). If necessary, analyze
the water for all target metals prior to field use. All target
metals should be less than 1 ng/ml.
4.2.3 Nitric Acid (HNO3). Concentrated. Baker Instra-
analyzed or equivalent.
4.2.4 Hydrochloric Acid (HCL). Concentrated. Baker Instra-
analyzed or equivalent.
4.2.5 Hydrogen Peroxide (H2O2), 30 Percent (V/V).
4.2.6 Potassium Permanganate (KMnO4).
4.2.7 Sulfuric Acid (H2SO4). Concentrated.
4.2.8 Silica Gel and Crushed Ice. Same as Method 5, Sections
3.1.2 and 3.1.4, respectively.
4.3 Pretest Preparation of Sampling Reagents.
4.3.1 HNO3/H2O2 Absorbing Solution, 5 Percent
HNO3/10 Percent H2O2. Add carefully with stirring 50
ml of concentrated HNO3 to a 1000-ml volumeric flask containing
approximately 500 ml of water, and then add carefully with stirring
333 ml of 30 percent H2O2. Dilute to volume with water.
Mix well. This reagent shall contain less than 2 ng/ml of each
target metal.
4.3.2 Acidic KMnO4 Absorbing Solution, 4 Percent
KMnO4 (W/V), 10 Percent H2SO4 (V/V). Prepare fresh
daily. Mix carefully, with stirring, 100 ml of concentrated
H2SO4 into approximately 800 ml of water, and add water
with stirring to make a volume of 1 liter: this solution is 10
percent H2SO4 (V/V). Dissolve, with stirring, 40 g of
KMnO4 into 10 percent H2SO4 (V/V) and add 10 percent
H2SO4 (V/V) with stirring to make a volume of 1 liter.
Prepare and store in glass bottles to prevent degradation. This
reagent shall contain less than 2 ng/ml of Hg.
Precaution: To prevent autocatalytic decomposition of the
permanganate solution, filter the solution through Whatman 541
[[Page 18267]]
filter paper. Also, due to the potential reaction of the potassium
permanganate with the acid, there could be pressure buildup in the
solution storage bottle. Therefore these bottles shall not be fully
filled and shall be vented to relieve excess pressure and prevent
explosion potentials. Venting is required, but not in a manner that
will allow contamination of the solution. A No. 70-72 hole drilled
in the container cap and Teflon liner has been used.
4.3.3 HNO3, 0.1 N. Add with stirring 6.3 ml of
concentrated HNO3 (70 percent) to a flask containing
approximately 900 ml of water. Dilute to 1000 ml with water. Mix
well. This reagent shall contain less than 2 ng/ml of each target
metal.
4.3.4 HCl, 8 N. Carefully add with stirring 690 ml of
concentrated HCl to a flask containing 250 ml of water. Dilute to
1000 ml with water. Mix well. This reagent shall contain less than 2
ng/ml of Hg.
4.4 Glassware Cleaning Reagents.
4.4.1 HNO3, Concentrated. Fisher ACS grade or equivalent.
4.4.2 Water. To conform to ASTM Specification D1193-77, Type II
(incorporated by reference--See Sec. 60.17).
4.4.3 HNO3, 10 Percent (V/V). Add with stirring 500 ml of
concentrated HNO3 to a flask containing approximately 4000 ml
of water. Dilute to 5000 ml with water. Mix well. This reagent shall
contain less than 2 ng/ml of each target metal.
4.5 Sample Digestion and Analysis Reagents.
The metals standards, except Hg, may also be made from solid
chemicals as described in Citation 3 of the Bibliography. Refer to
Citations 1, 2, or 5 of the Bibliography for additional information
on Hg standards. The 1000 g/ml Hg stock solution standard
may be made according to Section 6.2.5 of Method 101A.
4.5.1 HCL, Concentrated.
4.5.2 Hydrofluoric Acid (HF), Concentrated.
4.5.3 HNO3, Concentrated. Baker Instra-analyzed or
equivalent.
4.5.4 HNO3, 50 Percent (V/V). Add with stirring 125 ml of
concentrated HNO3 to 100 ml of water. Dilute to 250 ml with
water. Mix well. This reagent shall contain less than 2 ng/ml of
each target metal.
4.5.5 HNO3, 5 Percent (V/V). Add with stirring 50 ml of
concentrated HNO3 to 800 ml of water. Dilute to 1000 ml with
water. Mix well. This reagent shall contain less than 2 ng/ml of
each target metal.
4.5.6 Water. To conform to ASTM Specification D1193-77, Type II
(incorporated by reference--See Sec. 60.17).
4.5.7 Hydroxylamine Hydrochloride and Sodium Chloride Solution.
See Citation 2 of the Bibliography for preparation.
4.5.8 Stannous Chloride. See Citation 2 of the Bibliography for
preparation.
4.5.9 KMnO4, 5 Percent (W/V). See Citation 2 of the
Bibliography for preparation.
4.5.10 H2SO4, Concentrated.
4.5.11 Potassium Persulfate, 5 Percent (W/V). See Citation 2 of
the Bibliography for preparation.
4.5.12 Nickel Nitrate, Ni (NO3)2 6H2O.
4.5.13 Lanthanum Oxide, La2O3.
4.5.14 Hg Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.15 Pb Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.16 As Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.17 Cd Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.18 Cr Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.19 Sb Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.20 Ba Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.21 Be Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.22 Co Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.23 Cu Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.24 Mn Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.25 Ni Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.26 P Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.27 Se Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.28 Ag Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.29 Tl Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.30 Zn Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.31 Al Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.32 Fe Standard (AAS Grade), 1000 g/ml.
4.5.33 Hg Standards and Quality Control Samples. Prepare fresh
weekly a 10 g/ml intermediate Hg standard by adding 5 ml of
1000 g/ml Hg stock solution prepared according to Method
101A to a 500-ml volumetric flask; dilute with stirring to 500 ml by
first carefully adding 20 ml of 15 percent HNO3 and then adding
water to the 500-ml volume. Mix well. Prepare a 200 ng/ml working Hg
standard solution fresh daily: add 5 ml of the 10 g/ml
intermediate standard to a 250-ml volumetric flask, and dilute to
250 ml with 5 ml of 4 percent KMnO4, 5 ml of 15 percent
HNO3, and then water. Mix well. Use at least five separate
aliquots of the working Hg standard solution and a blank to prepare
the standard curve. These aliquots and blank shall contain 0.0, 1.0,
2.0, 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 ml of the working standard solution
containing 0, 200, 400, 600, 800, and 1000 ng Hg, respectively.
Prepare quality control samples by making a separate 10 g/
ml standard and diluting until in the calibration range.
4.5.34 ICAP Standards and Quality Control Samples. Calibration
standards for ICAP analysis can be combined into four different
mixed standard solutions as follows:
Mixed Standard Solutions for ICAP Analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solution Elements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I...................................... As, Be, Cd, Mn, Pb, Se, Zn.
II..................................... Ba, Co, Cu, Fe.
III.................................... Al, Cr, Ni.
IV..................................... Ag, P, Sb, Tl.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prepare these standards by combining and diluting the appropriate
volumes of the 1000 g/ml solutions with 5 percent
HNO3. A minimum of one standard and a blank can be used to form
each calibration curve. However, prepare a separate quality control
sample spiked with known amounts of the target metals in quantities
in the mid-range of the calibration curve. Suggested standard levels
are 25 g/ml for Al, Cr and Pb, 15 g/ml for Fe, and
10 g/ml for the remaining elements. Prepare any standards
containing less than 1 g/ml of metal on a daily basis.
Standards containing greater than 1 g/ml of metal should be
stable for a minimum of 1 to 2 weeks. For ICP-MS, follow Method 6020
in EPA Publication SW-846 Third Edition (November 1986) including
updates I, II, IIA and IIB, as incorporated by reference in
Sec. 60.17(i).
4.5.35 GFAAS Standards. Sb, As, Cd, Co, Pb, Se, and Tl. Prepare
a 10 g/ml standard by adding 1 ml of 1000 g/ml
standard to a 100-ml volumetric flask. Dilute with stirring to 100
ml with 10 percent HNO3. For GFAAS, matrix match the standards.
Prepare a 100 ng/ml standard by adding 1 ml of the 10 g/ml
standard to a 100-ml volumetric flask, and dilute to 100 ml with the
appropriate matrix solution. Prepare other standards by diluting the
100 ng/ml standards. Use at least five standards to make up the
standard curve. Suggested levels are 0, 10, 50, 75, and 100 ng/ml.
Prepare quality control samples by making a separate 10 g/
ml standard and diluting until it is in the range of the samples.
Prepare any standards containing less than 1 g/ml of metal
on a daily basis. Standards containing greater than 1 g/ml
of metal should be stable for a minimum of 1 to 2 weeks.
4.5.36 Matrix Modifiers.
4.5.36.1 Nickel Nitrate, 1 Percent (V/V). Dissolve 4.956 g of
Ni (NO3)26H2O or other nickel compound
suitable for preparation of this matrix modifier in approximately 50
ml of water in a 100-ml volumetric flask. Dilute to 100 ml with
water.
4.5.36.2 Nickel Nitrate, 0.1 Percent (V/V). Dilute 10 ml of 1
percent nickel nitrate solution to 100 ml with water. Inject an
equal amount of sample and this modifier into the graphite furnace
during GFAAS analysis for As.
4.5.36.3 Lanthanum. Carefully dissolve 0.5864 g of
La2O3 in 10 ml of concentrated HNO3, and dilute the
solution by adding it with stirring to approximately 50 ml of water.
Dilute to 100 ml with water, and mix well. Inject an equal amount of
sample and this modifier into the graphite furnace during GFAAS
analysis for Pb.
4.5.37 Whatman 40 and 541 Filter Papers (or equivalent). For
filtration of digested samples.
5. Procedure
5.1 Sampling. The complexity of this method is such that, to
obtain reliable results,
[[Page 18268]]
both testers and analysts must be trained and experienced with the
test procedures, including source sampling; reagent preparation and
handling; sample handling; safety equipment and procedures;
analytical calculations; reporting; and the specific procedural
descriptions throughout this method.
5.1.1 Pretest Preparation. Follow the same general procedure
given in Method 5, Section 4.1.1, except that, unless particulate
emissions are to be determined, the filter need not be desiccated or
weighed. First, rinse all sampling train glassware with hot tap
water and then wash in hot soapy water. Next, rinse glassware three
times with tap water, followed by three additional rinses with
water. Then soak all glassware in a 10 percent (V/V) nitric acid
solution for a minimum of 4 hours, rinse three times with water,
rinse a final time with acetone, and allow to air dry. Cover all
glassware openings where contamination can occur until the sampling
train is assembled for sampling.
5.1.2 Preliminary Determinations. Same as Method 5, Section
4.1.2.
5.1.3 Preparation of Sampling Train.
5.1.3.1 Set up the sampling train as shown in Figure 29-1.
Follow the same general procedures given in Method 5, Section 4.1.3,
except place 100 ml of the HNO3/H2O2 solution
(Section 4.3.1. of this method) in each of the second and third
impingers as shown in Figure 29-1. Placee 100 ml of the acidic
KMnO4 absorbing solution (Section 4.3.2 of this method) in each
of the fifth and sixth impingers as shown in Figure 29-1, and
transfer approximately 200 to 300 g of pre-weighed silica gel from
its container to the last impinger. Alternatively, the silica gel
may be weighed directly in the impinger just prior to final train
assembly.
5.1.3.2 Based on the specific source sampling conditions, the
use of an empty first impinger can be eliminated if the moisture to
be collected in the impingers will be less than approximately 100
ml.
5.1.3.3 If Hg analysis will not be performed, the fourth,
fifth, and sixth impingers as shown in Figure 29-1 are not required.
5.1.3.4 To insure leak-free sampling train connections and to
prevent possible sample contamination problems, use Teflon tape or
other non-contaminating material instead of silicone grease.
Precaution: Exercise extreme care to prevent contamination
within the train. Prevent the acidic KMnO4 from contacting any
glassware that contains sample material to be analyzed for Mn.
Prevent acidic H2O2 from mixing with the acidic
KMnO4.
5.1.4 Leak-Check Procedures. Follow the leak-check procedures
given in Method 5, Section 4.1.4.1 (Pretest Leak-Check), Section
4.1.4.2 (Leak-Checks During the Sample Run), and Section 4.1.4.3
(Post-Test Leak-Checks).
5.1.5 Sampling Train Operation. Follow the procedures given in
Method 5, Section 4.1.5. When sampling for Hg, use a procedure
analagous to that described in Section 7.1.1 of Method 101A, 40 CFR
Part 61, Appendix B, if necessary to maintain the desired color in
the last acidified permanganate impinger. For each run, record the
data required on a data sheet such as the one shown in Figure 5-2 of
Method 5.
5.1.6 Calculation of Percent Isokinetic. Same as Method 5,
Section 4.1.6.
5.2 Sample Recovery.
5.2.1 Begin cleanup procedures as soon as the probe is removed
from the stack at the end of a sampling period. The probe should be
allowed to cool prior to sample recovery. When it can be safely
handled, wipe off all external particulate matter near the tip of
the probe nozzle and place a rinsed, non-contaminating cap over the
probe nozzle to prevent losing or gaining particulate matter. Do not
cap the probe tip tightly while the sampling train is cooling; a
vacuum can form in the filter holder with the undesired result of
drawing liquid from the impingers onto the filter.
5.2.2 Before moving the sampling train to the cleanup site,
remove the probe from the sampling train and cap the open outlet. Be
careful not to lose any condensate that might be present. Cap the
filter inlet where the probe was fastened. Remove the umbilical cord
from the last impinger and cap the impinger. Cap the filter holder
outlet and impinger inlet. Use non-contaminating caps, whether
ground-glass stoppers, plastic caps, serum caps, or Teflon tape to
close these openings.
5.2.3 Alternatively, the following procedure may be used to
disassemble the train before the probe and filter holder/oven are
completely cooled: Initially disconnect the filter holder outlet/
impinger inlet and loosely cap the open ends. Then disconnect the
probe from the filter holder or cyclone inlet and loosely cap the
open ends. Cap the probe tip and remove the umbilical cord as
previously described.
5.2.4 Transfer the probe and filter-impinger assembly to a
cleanup area that is clean and protected from the wind and other
potential causes of contamination or loss of sample. Inspect the
train before and during disassembly and note any abnormal
conditions. Take special precautions to assure that all the items
necessary for recovery do not contaminate the samples. The sample is
recovered and treated as follows (see schematic in Figures 29-2a and
29-2b):
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
[[Page 18269]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP96.001
[[Page 18270]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP96.002
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
[[Page 18271]]
5.2.5 Container No. 1 (Sample Filter). Carefully remove the
filter from the filter holder and place it in its labeled petri dish
container. To handle the filter, use either acid-washed
polypropylene or Teflon coated tweezers or clean, disposable
surgical gloves rinsed with water and dried. If it is necessary to
fold the filter, make certain the particulate cake is inside the
fold. Carefully transfer the filter and any particulate matter or
filter fibers that adhere to the filter holder gasket to the petri
dish by using a dry (acid-cleaned) nylon bristle brush. Do not use
any metal-containing materials when recovering this train. Seal the
labeled petri dish.
5.2.6 Container No. 2. (Acetone Rinse). Perform this procedure
only if a determination of particulate emissions is to be made.
Quantitatively recover particulate matter and any condensate from
the probe nozzle, probe fitting, probe liner, and front half of the
filter holder by washing these components with a total of 100 ml of
acetone, while simultaneously taking great care to see that no dust
on the outside of the probe or other surfaces gets in the sample.
The use of exactly 100 ml is necessary for the subsequent blank
correction procedures. Distilled water may be used instead of
acetone when approved by the Administrator and shall be used when
specified by the Administrator; in these cases, save a water blank
and follow the Administrator's directions on analysis.
5.2.6.1 Carefully remove the probe nozzle, and clean the inside
surface by rinsing with acetone from a wash bottle while brushing
with a non-metallic brush. Brush until the acetone rinse shows no
visible particles, then make a final rinse of the inside surface
with acetone.
5.2.6.2 Brush and rinse the sample exposed inside parts of the
probe fitting with acetone in a similar way until no visible
particles remain. Rinse the probe liner with acetone by tilting and
rotating the probe while squirting acetone into its upper end so
that all inside surfaces will be wetted with acetone. Allow the
acetone to drain from the lower end into the sample container. A
funnel may be used to aid in transferring liquid washings to the
container. Follow the acetone rinse with a non-metallic probe brush.
Hold the probe in an inclined position, squirt acetone into the
upper end as the probe brush is being pushed with a twisting action
three times through the probe. Hold a sample container underneath
the lower end of the probe, and catch any acetone and particulate
matter which is brushed through the probe until no visible
particulate matter is carried out with the acetone or until none
remains in the probe liner on visual inspection. Rinse the brush
with acetone, and quantitatively collect these washings in the
sample container. After the brushing, make a final acetone rinse of
the probe as described above.
5.2.6.3 It is recommended that two people clean the probe to
minimize sample losses. Between sampling runs, keep brushes clean
and protected from contamination. Clean the inside of the front-half
of the filter holder by rubbing the surfaces with a non-metallic
brush and rinsing with acetone. Rinse each surface three times or
more if needed to remove visible particulate. Make a final rinse of
the brush and filter holder. After all acetone washings and
particulate matter have been collected in the sample container,
tighten the lid so that acetone will not leak out when shipped to
the laboratory. Mark the height of the fluid level to determine
whether or not leakage occurred during transport. Clearly label the
container to identify its contents.
5.2.7 Container No. 3 (Probe Rinse). Keep the probe assembly
clean and free from contamination during the probe rinse. Rinse the
probe nozzle and fitting, probe liner, and front-half of the filter
holder thoroughly with a total of 100 ml of 0.1 N HNO3, and
place the wash into a sample storage container.
(Note: The use of a total of exactly 100 ml is necessary for the
subsequent blank correction procedures.)
Perform the rinses as applicable and generally as described in
Method 12, Section 5.2.2. Record the volume of the rinses. Mark the
height of the fluid level on the outside of the storage container
and use this mark to determine if leakage occurs during transport.
Seal the container, and clearly label the contents. Finally, rinse
the nozzle, probe liner, and front-half of the filter holder with
water followed by acetone, and discard these rinses.
5.2.8 Container No. 4 (Impingers 1 through 3, Moisture Knockout
Impinger, when used, HNO3/H2O2 Impingers Contents and
Rinses). Due to the potentially large quantity of liquid involved,
the tester may place the impinger solutions from impingers 1 through
3 in more than one container, if necessary. Measure the liquid in
the first three impingers to within 0.5 ml using a graduated
cylinder. Record the volume. This information is required to
calculate the moisture content of the sampled flue gas. Clean each
of the first three impingers, the filter support, the back half of
the filter housing, and connecting glassware by thoroughly rinsing
with 100 ml of 0.1 N HNO3 using the procedure as applicable in
Method 12, Section 5.2.4.
(Note: The use of exactly 100 ml of 0.1 N HNO3 rinse is
necessary for the subsequent blank correction procedures. Combine
the rinses and impinger solutions, measure and record the final
total volume. Mark the height of the fluid level, seal the
container, and clearly label the contents.)
5.2.9 Container Nos. 5A (0.1 N HNO3), 5B (KMnO4/
H2SO4 absorbing solution), and 5C (8 N HCl rinse and
dilution).
5.2.9.1 When sampling for Hg, pour all the liquid from the
impinger (normally impinger No. 4) that immediately preceded the two
permanganate impingers into a graduated cylinder and measure the
volume to within 0.5 ml. This information is required to calculate
the moisture content of the sampled flue gas. Place the liquid in
Container No. 5A. Rinse the impinger with exactly 100 ml of 0.1 N
HNO3 and place this rinse in Container No. 5A.
5.2.9.2 Pour all the liquid from the two permanganate impingers
into a graduated cylinder and measure the volume to within 0.5 ml.
This information is required to calculate the moisture content of
the sampled flue gas. Place this acidic KMnO4 solution into
Container No. 5B. Using a total of exactly 100 ml of fresh acidified
KMnO4 solution for all rinses (approximately 33 ml per rinse),
rinse the two permanganate impingers and connecting glassware a
minimum of three times. Pour the rinses into Container No. 5B,
carefully assuring transfer of all loose precipitated materials from
the two impingers. Similarly, using 100 ml total of water, rinse the
permanganate impingers and connecting glass a minimum of three
times, and pour the rinses into Container 5B, carefully assuring
transfer of any loose precipitated material. Mark the height of the
fluid level, and clearly label the contents. Read the Precaution: in
Section 4.3.2. NOTE: Due to the potential reaction of KMnO4
with acid, pressure buildup can occur in the sample storage bottles.
Do not fill these bottles completely and take precautions to relieve
excess pressure. A No. 70-72 hole drilled in the container cap and
Teflon liner has been used successfully.
5.2.9.3 If no visible deposits remain after the water rinse, no
further rinse is necessary. However, if deposits remain on the
impinger surfaces, wash them with 25 ml of 8 N HCl, and place the
wash in a separate sample container labeled No. 5C containing 200 ml
of water. First, place 200 ml of water in the container. Then wash
the impinger walls and stem with the HCl by turning the impinger on
its side and rotating it so that the HC1 contacts all inside
surfaces. Use a total of only 25 ml of 8 N HCl for rinsing both
permanganate impingers combined. Rinse the first impinger, then pour
the actual rinse used for the first impinger into the second
impinger for its rinse. Finally, pour the 25 ml of 8 N HCl rinse
carefully into the container. Mark the height of the fluid level on
the outside of the container to determine if leakage occurs during
transport.
5.2.10 Container No. 6 (Silica Gel). Note the color of the
indicating silica gel to determine whether it has been completely
spent and make a notation of its condition. Transfer the silica gel
from its impinger to its original container and seal it. The tester
may use a funnel to pour the silica gel and a rubber policeman to
remove the silica gel from the impinger. The small amount of
particles that might adhere to the impinger wall need not be
removed. Do not use water or other liquids to transfer the silica
gel since weight gained in the silica gel impinger is used for
moisture calculations. Alternatively, if a balance is available in
the field, record the weight of the spent silica gel (or silica gel
plus impinger) to the nearest 0.5 g.
5.2.11 Container No. 7 (Acetone Blank). If particulate
emissions are to be determined, at least once during each field
test, place a 100-ml portion of the acetone used in the sample
recovery process into a container labeled No. 7. Seal the container.
5.2.12 Container No. 8A (0.1 N HNO3 Blank). At least once
during each field test, place 300 ml of the 0.1 N HNO3 solution
used in the sample recovery process into a container labeled No. 8A.
Seal the container.
5.2.13 Container No. 8B (Water Blank). At least once during
each field test, place 100 ml of the water used in the sample
recovery process into a container labeled No. 8B. Seal the
container.
[[Page 18272]]
5.2.14 Container No. 9 (5 Percent HNO3/10 Percent
H2O2 Blank). At least once during each field test, place
200 ml of the 5 Percent HNO3/10 Percent H2O2 solution
used as the nitric acid impinger reagent into a container labeled
No. 9. Seal the container.
5.2.15 Container No. 10 (Acidified KMnO4 Blank). At least
once during each field test, place 100 ml of the acidified
KMnO4 solution used as the impinger solution and in the sample
recovery process into a container labeled No. 10. Prepare the
container as described in Section 5.2.9.2. Read the Precaution: in
Section 4.3.2. and read the Note in Section 5.2.9.2.
5.2.16 Container No. 11 (8 N HCl Blank). At least once during
each field test, place 200 ml of water into a sample container
labeled No. 11. Then carefully add with stirring 25 ml of 8 N HCl.
Mix well and seal the container.
5.2.17 Container No. 12 (Sample Filter Blank). Once during each
field test, place into a petri dish labeled No. 12 three unused
blank filters from the same lot as the sampling filters. Seal the
petri dish.
5.3 Sample Preparation. Note the level of the liquid in each of
the containers and determine if any sample was lost during shipment.
If a noticeable amount of leakage has occurred, either void the
sample or use methods, subject to the approval of the Administrator,
to correct the final results. A diagram illustrating sample
preparation and analysis procedures for each of the sample train
components is shown in Figure 29-3.
5.3.1 Container No. 1 (Sample Filter).
5.3.1.1 If particulate emissions are being determined, first
desiccate the filter and filter catch without added heat (do not
heat the filters to speed the drying) and weigh to a constant weight
as described in Section 4.3 of Method 5.
5.3.1.2 Following this procedure, or initially, if particulate
emissions are not being determined in addition to metals analysis,
divide the filter with its filter catch into portions containing
approximately 0.5 g each. Place the pieces in the analyst's choice
of either individual microwave pressure relief vessels or ParrR
Bombs. Add 6 ml of concentrated HNO3 and 4 ml of concentrated
HF to each vessel. For microwave heating, microwave the samples for
approximately 12 to 15 minutes total heating time as follows: heat
for 2 to 3 minutes, then turn off the microwave for 2 to 3 minutes,
then heat for 2 to 3 minutes, etc., continue this alternation until
the 12 to 15 minutes total heating time are completed (this
procedure should comprise approximately 24 to 30 minutes at 600
watts). Microwave heating times are approximate and are dependent
upon the number of samples being digested simultaneously. Sufficient
heating is evidenced by sorbent reflux within the vessel. For
conventional heating, heat the ParrR Bombs at 140 deg.C (285
deg.F) for 6 hours. Then cool the samples to room temperature, and
combine with the acid digested probe rinse as required in Section
5.3.3.
5.3.1.3 If the sampling train includes an optional glass
cyclone in front of the filter, prepare and digest the cyclone catch
by the procedures described in section 5.3.1.2 and then combine the
digestate with the digested filter sample.
5.3.2 Container No. 2 (Acetone Rinse). Note the level of liquid
in the container and confirm on the analysis sheet whether or not
leakage occurred during transport. If a noticeable amount of leakage
has occurred, either void the sample or use methods, subject to the
approval of the Administrator, to correct the final results. Measure
the liquid in this container either volumetrically within 1 ml or
gravimetrically within 0.5 g. Transfer the contents to an acid-
cleaned, tared 250-ml beaker and evaporate to dryness at ambient
temperature and pressure. If particulate emissions are being
determined, desiccate for 24 hours without added heat, weigh to a
constant weight according to the procedures described in Section 4.3
of Method 5, and report the results to the nearest 0.1 mg.
Redissolve the residue with 10 ml of concentrated HNO3.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
[[Page 18273]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP96.003
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
[[Page 18274]]
Quantitatively combine the resultant sample, including all liquid
and any particulate matter, with Container No. 3 before beginning
Section 5.3.3.
5.3.3 Container No. 3 (Probe Rinse). Verify that the pH of this
sample is 2 or lower. If it is not, acidify the sample by careful
addition with stirring of concentrated HNO3 to pH 2. Use water
to rinse the sample into a beaker, and cover the beaker with a
ribbed watch glass. Reduce the sample volume to approximately 20 ml
by heating on a hot plate at a temperature just below boiling.
Digest the sample in microwave vessels or ParrR Bombs by
quantitatively transferring the sample to the vessel or bomb,
carefully adding the 6 ml of concentrated HNO3, 4 ml of
concentrated HF, and then continuing to follow the procedures
described in Section 5.3.1.2. Then combine the resultant sample
directly with the acid digested portions of the filter prepared
previously in Section 5.3.1.2. The resultant combined sample is
referred to as ``Sample Fraction 1''. Filter the combined sample
using Whatman 541 filter paper. Dilute to 300 ml (or the appropriate
volume for the expected metals concentration) with water. This
diluted sample is ``Analytical Fraction 1''. Measure and record the
volume of Analytical Fraction 1 to within 0.1 ml. Quantitatively
remove a 50-ml aliquot and label as ``Analytical Fraction 1B''.
Label the remaining 250-ml portion as ``Analytical Fraction 1A''.
Analytical Fraction 1A is used for ICAP or AAS analysis for all
desired metals except Hg. Analytical Fraction 1B is used for the
determination of front-half Hg.
5.3.4 Container No. 4 (Impingers 1-3). Measure and record the
total volume of this sample to within 0.5 ml and label it ``Sample
Fraction 2''. Remove a 75- to 100-ml aliquot for Hg analysis and
label the aliquot ``Analytical Fraction 2B''. Label the remaining
portion of Container No. 4 as ``Sample Fraction 2A''. Sample
Fraction 2A defines the volume of Analytical Fraction 2A prior to
digestion. All of Sample Fraction 2A is digested to produce
``Analytical Fraction 2A''. Analytical Fraction 2A defines the
volume of Sample Fraction 2A after its digestion and the volume of
Analytical Fraction 2A is normally 150 ml. Analytical Fraction 2A is
analyzed for all metals except Hg. Verify that the pH of Sample
Fraction 2A is 2 or lower. If necessary, use concentrated HNO3
by careful addition and stirring to lower Sample Fraction 2A to pH
2. Use water to rinse Sample Fraction 2A into a beaker and then
cover the beaker with a ribbed watch glass. Reduce Sample Fraction
2A to approximately 20 ml by heating on a hot plate at a temperature
just below boiling. Then follow either of the digestion procedures
described in Sections 5.3.4.1 or 5.3.4.2.
5.3.4.1 Conventional Digestion Procedure. Add 30 ml of 50
percent HNO3, and heat for 30 minutes on a hot plate to just
below boiling. Add 10 ml of 3 percent H2O2 and heat for 10
more minutes. Add 50 ml of hot water, and heat the sample for an
additional 20 minutes. Cool, filter the sample, and dilute to 150 ml
(or the appropriate volume for the expected metals concentrations)
with water. This dilution produces Analytical Fraction 2A. Measure
and record the volume to within 0.1 ml.
5.3.4.2 Microwave Digestion Procedure. Add 10 ml of 50 percent
HNO3 and heat for 6 minutes total heating time in alternations
of 1 to 2 minutes at 600 Watts followed by 1 to 2 minutes with no
power, etc., similar to the procedure described in Section 5.3.1.
Allow the sample to cool. Add 10 ml of 3 percent H2O2 and
heat for 2 more minutes. Add 50 ml of hot water, and heat for an
additional 5 minutes. Cool, filter the sample, and dilute to 150 ml
(or the appropriate volume for the expected metals concentrations)
with water. This dilution produces Analytical Fraction 2A. Measure
and record the volume to within 0.1 ml.
(Note: All microwave heating times given are approximate and are
dependent upon the number of samples being digested at a time.
Heating times as given above have been found acceptable for
simultaneous digestion of up to 12 individual samples. Sufficient
heating is evidenced by solvent reflux within the vessel.)
5.3.5 Container No. 5A (Impinger 4), Container Nos. 5B and 5C
(Impingers 5 and 6). Keep the samples in Containers Nos. 5A, 5B, and
5C separate from each other. Measure and record the volume of 5A to
within 0.5 ml. Label the contents of Container No. 5A to be
Analytical Fraction 3A. To remove any brown MnO2 precipitate
from the contents of Container No. 5B, filter its contents through
Whatman 40 filter paper into a 500 ml volumetric flask and dilute to
volume with water. Save the filter for digestion of the brown
MnO2 precipitate. Label the 500 ml filtrate from Container No.
5B to be Analytical Fraction 3B. Analyze Analytical Fraction 3B for
Hg within 48 hours of the filtration step. Place the saved filter,
which was used to remove the brown MnO2 precipitate, into an
appropriately sized vented container, which will allow release of
any gases including chlorine formed when the filter is digested. In
a laboratory hood which will remove any gas produced by the
digestion of the MnO2, add 25 ml of 8 N HCl to the filter and
allow to digest for a minimum of 24 hours at room temperature.
Filter the contents of Container No. 5C through a Whatman 40 filter
into a 500-ml volumetric flask. Then filter the result of the
digestion of the brown MnO2 from Container No. 5B through a
Whatman 40 filter into the same 500-ml volumetric flask, and dilute
and mix well to volume with water. Discard the Whatman 40 filter.
Mark this combined 500-ml dilute HCl solution as Analytical Fraction
3C.
5.3.6 Container No. 6 (Silica Gel). Weigh the spent silica gel
(or silica gel plus impinger) to the nearest 0.5 g using a balance.
5.4 Sample Analysis. For each sampling train sample run, seven
individual analytical samples are generated; two for all desired
metals except Hg, and five for Hg. A schematic identifying each
sample container and the prescribed analytical preparation and
analysis scheme is shown in Figure 29-3. The first two analytical
samples, labeled Analytical Fractions 1A and 1B, consist of the
digested samples from the front-half of the train. Analytical
Fraction 1A is for ICAP, ICP-MS or AAS analysis as described in
Sections 5.4.1 and 5.4.2, respectively. Analytical Fraction 1B is
for front-half Hg analysis as described in Section 5.4.3. The
contents of the back-half of the train are used to prepare the third
through seventh analytical samples. The third and fourth analytical
samples, labeled Analytical Fractions 2A and 2B, contain the samples
from the moisture removal impinger No. 1, if used, and
HNO3H2O2 impingers Nos. 2 and 3. Analytical Fraction
2A is for ICAP, ICP-MS or AAS analysis for target metals, except Hg.
Analytical Fraction 2B is for analysis for Hg. The fifth through
seventh analytical samples, labeled Analytical Fractions 3A, 3B, and
3C, consist of the impinger contents and rinses from the empty
impinger No. 4 and the H2SO4/KMnO4 Impingers Nos. 5
and 6. These analytical samples are for analysis for Hg as described
in Section 5.4.3. The total back-half Hg catch is determined from
the sum of Analytical Fractions 2B, 3A, 3B, and 3C. Analytical
Fractions 1A and 2A can be combined proportionally prior to
analysis.
5.4.1 ICAP and ICP-MS Analysis. Analyze Analytical Fractions 1A
and 2A by ICAP using Method 6010 or Method 200.7 (40 CFR part 136,
appendix C). Calibrate the ICAP, and set up an analysis program as
described in Method 6010 or Method 200.7. Follow the quality control
procedures described in Section 7.3.1. Recommended wavelengths for
analysis are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wavelength
Element (nm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aluminum.................................................... 308.215
Antimony.................................................... 206.833
Arsenic..................................................... 193.696
Barium...................................................... 455.403
Beryllium................................................... 313.042
Cadmium..................................................... 226.502
Chromium.................................................... 267.716
Cobalt...................................................... 228.616
Copper...................................................... 324.754
Iron........................................................ 259.940
Lead........................................................ 220.353
Manganese................................................... 257.610
Nickel...................................................... 231.604
Phosphorous................................................. 214.914
Selenium.................................................... 196.026
Silver...................................................... 328.068
Thallium.................................................... 190.864
Zinc........................................................ 213.856
------------------------------------------------------------------------
These wavelengths represent the best combination of specificity
and potential detection limit. Other wavelengths may be substituted
if they can provide the needed specificity and detection limit, and
are treated with the same corrective techniques for spectral
interference. Initially, analyze all samples for the target metals
(except Hg) plus Fe and Al. If Fe and Al are present, the sample
might have to be diluted so that each of these elements is at a
concentration of less than 50 ppm so as to reduce their spectral
interferences on As, Cd, Cr, and Pb. Perform ICP-MS analysis by
following Method 6020 in EPA Publication SW-846 Third Edition
(November 1986) including updates I, II, IIA, and IIB, as
incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17(i).
(Note: When analyzing samples in a HF matrix, an alumina torch
should be used;
[[Page 18275]]
since all front-half samples will contain HF, use an alumina torch.)
5.4.2. AAS by Direct Aspiration and/or GFAAS. If analysis of
metals in Analytical Fractions 1A and 2A by using GFAAS or direct
aspiration AAS is needed, use Table 29-2 to determine which
techniques and procedures to apply for each target metal. Use Table
29-2, if necessary, to determine techniques for minimization of
interferences. Calibrate the instrument according to Section 6.3 and
follow the qualit
FR Doc. 96-9834 Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Addition of Method 29 to Appendix A of Part 60 and Amendments to Method 101A of Appendix B of Part 61
y control procedures specified in Section 7.3.2.
Table 29-2.--Applicable Techniques, Methods and Minimization of Interference for AAS Analysis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interferences
Metal Technique SW-846 \1\ Wavelength ---------------------------------------------
method No. (nm) Cause Minimization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fe............... Aspiration........... 7380 248.3 Contamination........ Great care taken to
avoid contamination.
Pb............... Aspiration........... 7420 283.3 217.0 nm alternate... Background correction
required.
Pb............... Furnace.............. 7421 283.3 Poor recoveries...... Matrix modifier, add
10 ul of phosphorus
acid to 1 ml of
prepared sample in
sampler cup.
Mn............... Aspiration........... 7460 279.5 403.1 nm alternate... Background correction
required.
Ni............... Aspiration........... 7520 232.0 352.4 nm alternate Background correction
Fe, Co, and Cr. required.
Matrix matching or
nitrous-oxide/
acetylene flame.
Nonlinear response... sample dilution or
use 352.3 nm line.
Se............... Furnace.............. 7740 196.0 Volatility........... Spike samples and
reference materials
and add nickel
nitrate to minimize
volatilization.
Adsorption & scatter. Background correction
is required and
Zeeman background
correction can be
useful.
Ag............... Aspiration........... 7760 328.1 Adsorption & Scatter Background correction
AgCl insoluble. is required. Avoid
Hydrochloric acid
unless silver is in
solution as a
chloride complex
Sample and standards
monitored for
aspiration rate.
Tl............... Aspiration........... 7840 276.8 ..................... Background correction
is required.
Hydrochloric acid
should not be used.
Tl............... Furnace.............. 7841 276.8 Hydrochloric acid or Background correction
chloride. is required.
Verify that losses
are not occurring
for volatization by
spiked samples or
standard addition;
Palladium is a
suitable matrix
modifier.
Zn............... Aspiration........... 7950 213.9 High Si, Cu, & P Strontium removes Cu
Contamination. and phosphate, Great
care taken to avoid
contamination.
Sb............... Aspiration........... 7040 217.6 1000 mg/ml Pb Ni, Cu, Use secondary
or acid. wavelengths of
231.1.nm; match
sample & standards
acid concentration
or use nitrous
oxidefacetylene
flame.
Sb............... Furnace.............. 7041 217.6 High Pb.............. Secondary Wavelength
or Zeeman
correction.
As............... Furnace.............. 7060 193.7 Arsenic Spiked samples and
volatilization. add nickel nitrate
Aluminum............. solution to
digestates prior to
analysis.
Use Zeeman background
correction.
Ba............... Aspiration 7080...... 7080 553.6 Calcium.............. High hollow cathode
Barium ionization.... current and narrow
band set.
2 ml of KCl per 100
ml of sample.
Be............... Aspiration........... 7090 234.9 500 ppm Al High Mg Add 0.1% fluoride.
and Si. Use method of
standard additions.
Be............... Furnace.............. 7091 234.9 Be in optical path... Optimize parameters
to minimize effects.
Cd............... Aspiration........... 7130 228.8 Absorption and light Background correction
scattering. is required.
[[Page 18276]]
Cd............... Furnace.............. 7131 228.8 As above............. As above.
Excess Chloride...... Ammonium phosphate
Pipet tips........... used as a matrix
modifier.
Use cadmiun-free
tips.
Cr............... Aspiration........... 7190 357.9 Akali metal.......... KCl ionization
suppressant in
samples and
standards--Consult
mfgs literature.
Co............... Furnace.............. 7201 240.7 Excess chloride...... Use Method of
Standard Additions.
Cr............... Furnace.............. 7191 357.9 200 mg/L Ca and P.... All calcium nitrate
for a known constant
effect and to
eliminate effect of
phosphate.
Cu............... Aspiration........... 7210 324.7 Absorption & scatter. Consult
manufacturer's
manual.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Refer to EPA publication SW-846 Third Edition (November 1986) including updates I, II, IIA, and IIB, as
incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17(i).
5.4.3 CVAAS Hg analysis. Analyze Analytical Fractions 1B, 2B,
3A, 3B, and 3C separately for Hg using CVAAS following the method
outlined in Method 7470 in EPA Publication SW-846 Third Edition
(November 1986) including updates I, II, IIA and IIB, as
incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17(i) or in Standard Methods
for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 16th Edition, (1985),
Method 303F, as incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17, or,
optionally using NOTE No. 2 in this section. Set up the calibration
curve (zero to 1000 ng) as described in Method 7470 or similar to
Method 303F using 300-ml BOD bottles instead of Erlenmeyers. Perform
the following for each Hg analysis. From each original sample,
select and record an aliquot in the size range from 1 ml to 10 ml.
If no prior knowledge of the expected amount of Hg in the sample
exists, a 5 ml aliquot is suggested for the first dilution to 100 ml
(see NOTE No. 1 in this Section). The total amount of Hg in the
aliquot shall be less than 1 g and within the range (zero
to 1000 ng) of the calibration curve. Place the sample aliquot into
a separate 300-ml BOD bottle, and add enough water to make a total
volume of 100 ml. Next add to it sequentially the sample digestion
solutions and perform the sample preparation described in the
procedures of Method 7470 or Method 303F. (See NOTE No. 2 in this
Section). If the maximum readings are off-scale (because Hg in the
aliquot exceeded the calibration range; including the situation
where only a 1-ml aliquot of the original sample was digested), then
dilute the original sample (or a portion of it) with 0.15 percent
HNO3 (1.5 ml concentrated HNO3 per liter aqueous solution)
so that when a 1- to 10-ml aliquot of the ``0.15 HNO3 percent
dilution of the original sample'' is digested and analyzed by the
procedures described above, it will yield an analysis within the
range of the calibration curve.
Note No. 1 to Section 5.4.3. When Hg levels in the sample
fractions are below the in-stack detection limit given in Table 29-
1, select a 10 ml aliquot for digestion and analysis as described.
Note No. 2 to Section 5.4.3. Optionally, Hg can be analyzed by
using the CVAAS analytical procedures given by some instrument
manufacturer's directions. These include calibration and quality
control procedures for the Leeman Model PS200, the Perkin Elmer FIAS
systems, and similar models, if available, of other instrument
manufacturers. For digestion and analyses by these instruments,
perform the following two steps:
(1) Digest the sample aliquot through the addition of the
aqueous hydroxylamine hydrochloride/sodium chloride solution the
same as described in this Section 5.4.3.: (The Leeman, Perkin Elmer,
and similar instruments described in this note add automatically the
necessary stannous chloride solution during the automated analysis
of Hg.) and
(2) Upon completion of the digestion described in paragraph (1),
of this note, analyze the sample according to the instrument
manufacturer's directions. This approach allows multiple (including
duplicate) automated analyses of a digested sample aliquot.
6. Calibration
Maintain a laboratory log of all calibrations.
6.1 Sampling Train Calibration. Calibrate the sampling train
components according to the indicated sections of Method 5: Probe
Nozzle (Section 5.1); Pitot Tube (Section 5.2); Metering System
(Section 5.3); Probe Heater (Section 5.4); Temperature Gauges
(Section 5.5); Leake-Check of the Metering System (Section 5.6); and
Barometer (Section 5.7).
6.2 Industively Coupled Argon Plasma Spectrometer Calibration.
Prepare standards as outlined in Section 4.5. Profile and calibrate
the instrument according to the manufacturer's recommended
procedures using those standards. Check the calibration once per
hour. If the instrument does not reproduce the standard
concentrations within 10 percent, perform the complete calibration
procedures. Perform ICP-MS analysis by following Method 6020 in EPA
Publication SW-846 Third Edition (November 1986) including updates
I, II, IIA and IIB, as incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17(i).
6.3 Atomic Absorption Spectrometer--Direct Aspiration AAS,
GFAAS, and CVAAS analyses. Prepare the standards as outlined in
Section 4.5 and use them to calibrate the spectrometer. Calibration
procedures are also outlined in the EPA methods referred to in Table
29-2 and in Method 7470 in EPA Publication SW-846 Third Edition
(November 1986) including updates I, II, IIA and IIB, as
incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17(i) or in Standard Methods
for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 16th Edition, (1985),
Method 303F (for Hg) as incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17. Run
each standard curve in duplicate and use the mean values to
calculate the calibration line. Recalibrate the instrument
approximately once every 10 to 12 samples.
7. Quality Control
7.1 Field Reagent Blanks, if analyzed. Perform the digestion
and analysis of the blanks in Container Nos. 7 through 12 that were
produced in Sections 5.2.11 through 5.2.17, respectively. For Hg
field reagent blanks, use a 10 ml aliquot for digestion and
analysis.
7.1.1 Digest and analyze one of the filters from Container No.
12 per Section 5.3.1, 100 ml from Container No. 7 per Section 5.3.2,
and 100 ml from Container No. 8A per Section 5.3.3. This step
produces blanks for Analytical Fractions 1A and 1B.
7.1.2 Combine 100 ml of Container No. 8A with 200 ml from
Container No. 9, and digest and analyze the resultant volume per
Section 5.3.4. This step produces blanks for Analytical Fractions 2A
and 2B.
7.1.3 Digest and analyze a 100-ml portion of Container No. 8A
to produce a blank for Analytical Fraction 3A.
7.1.4 Combine 100 ml from Container No. 10 with 33 ml from
Container No. 8B to produce a blank for Analytical Fraction 3B.
Filter the resultant 133 ml as described for Container No. 5B in
Section 5.3.5, except do not dilute the 133ml. Analyze this blank
for Hg within 48 hrs. of the filtration step, and use 400 ml as the
blank volume when calculating the blank mass value. Use the
[[Page 18277]]
actual volumes of the other analytical blanks when calculating their
mass values.
7.1.5 Digest the filter that was used to remove any brown
MnO2 precipitate from the blank for Analytical Fraction 3B by
the same procedure as described in Section 5.3.5 for the similar
sample filter. Filter the digestate and the contents of Container
No. 11 through Whatman 40 paper into a 500-ml volumetric flask, and
dilute to volume with water. These steps produce a blank for
Analytical Fraction 3C.
7.1.6 Analyze the blanks for Analytical Fraction Blanks 1A and
2A per Section 5.4.1 and/or Section 5.4.2. Analyze the blanks for
Analytical Fractions 1B, 2B, 3A, 3B, and 3C per Section 5.4.3.
Analysis of the blank for Analytical Fraction 1A produces the front-
half reagent blank correction values for the desired metals except
for Hg; Analysis of the blank for Analytical Fraction 1B produces
the front-half reagent blank correction value for Hg. Analysis of
the blank for Analytical Fraction 2A produces the back-half reagent
blank correction values for all of the desired metals except for Hg,
while separate analyses of the blanks for Analytical Fractions 2B,
3A, 3B, and 3C produce the back-half reagent blank correction value
for Hg.
7.2 Quality Control Samples. Analyze the following quality
control samples.
7.2.1 ICAP and ICP-MS Analysis. Follow the respective quality
control descriptions in Section 8 of Methods 6010 and 6020 of EPA
Publication SW-846 Third Edition (November 1986) including updates
I, II, IIA and IIB, as incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17(i).
For the purposes of a source test that consists of three sample
runs, modify those requirements to include the following: two
instrument check standard runs, two calibration blank runs, one
interference check sample at the beginning of the analysis (analyze
by Method of Standard Additions unless within 25 percent), one
quality control sample to check the accuracy of the calibration
standards (required to be within 25 percent of calibration), and one
duplicate analysis (required to be within 20 percent of average or
repeat all analyses).
7.2.2. Direct Aspiration AAS and/or GFAAS Analysis for Sb, As,
Ba, Be, Cd, Cu, Cr, Co, Pb, Ni, Mn, Hg, P, Se, Ag, Tl, and Zn.
Analyze all samples in duplicate. Perform a matrix spike on at least
one front-half sample and one back-half sample, or one combined
sample. If recoveries of less than 75 percent or greater than 125
percent are obtained for the matrix spike, analyze each sample by
the Method of Standard Additions. Analyze a quality control sample
to check the accuracy of the calibration standards. If the results
are not within 20 percent, repeat the calibration.
7.2.3 CVAAS Analysis for Hg. Analyze all samples in duplicate.
Analyze a quality control sample to check the accuracy of the
calibration standards (if not within 15 percent, repeat
calibration). Perform a matrix spike on one sample (if not within 25
percent, analyze all samples by the Method of Standard Additions).
Additional information on quality control can be obtained from
Method 7470 of EPA Publication SW-846 Third Edition (November 1986)
including updates I, II, IIA and IIB, as incorporated by reference
in Sec. 60.17(i) or in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater, 16th Edition, (1985), Method 303F as incorporated by
reference in Sec. 60.17.
8. Calculations
8.1 Dry Gas Volume. Using the data from this test, calculate
Vm(std), the dry gas sample volume at standard conditions as
outlined in Section 6.3 of Method 5.
8.2 Volume of Water Vapor and Moisture Content. Using the total
volume of condensate collected during the source sampling, calculate
the volume of water vapor Vw(std) and the moisture content
Bws of the stack gas. Use Equations 5-2 and 5-3 of Method 5.
8.3 Stack Gas Velocity. Using the data from this test and
Equation 2-9 of Method 2, calculate the average stack gas velocity.
8.4 Metals (Except Hg) in Source Sample.
8.4.1 Analytical Fraction 1A, Front-Half, Metals (except Hg).
Calculate separately the amount of each metal collected in Sample
Fraction 1 of the sampling train using the following equation:
Mfh=Ca1 Fd Vsoln,1 Eq. 29-1
where:
Mfh=Total mass of each metal (except Hg) collected in the front
half of the sampling train (Sample Fraction 1), g.
Ca1=Concentration of metal in Analytical Fraction 1A as read
from the standard curve, g/ml.
Fd=Dilution factor (Fd = the inverse of the fractional
portion of the concentrated sample in the solution actually used in
the instrument to produce the reading Ca1. For example, if a 2
ml aliquot of Analytical Fraction 1A is diluted to 10 ml to place it
in the calibration range, Fd = 5).
Vsoln,1=Total volume of digested sample solution (Analytical
Fraction 1), ml.
8.4.1.1 If Analytical Fractions 1A and 2A are combined, use
proportional aliquots. Then make appropriate changes in Equations
29-1 through 29-3 to reflect this approach.
8.4.2 Analytical Fraction 2A, Back-Half, Metals (except Hg).
Calculate separately the amount of each metal collected in Fraction
2 of the sampling train using the following equation.
Mbh=Ca2 Fa Va Eq. 29-2
where:
Mbh=Total mass of each metal (except Hg) collected in the back-
half of the sampling train (Sample Fraction 2), g.
Ca2=Concentration of metal in Analytical Fraction 2A as read
from the standard curve, (g/ml).
Fa=Aliquot factor, volume of Sample Fraction 2 divided by
volume of Sample Fraction 2A (see Section 5.3.4.)
Va=Total volume of digested sample solution (Analytical
Fraction 2A), ml (see Section 5.3.4.1 or 5.3.4.2, as applicable).
8.4.3 Total Train, Metals (except Hg). Calculate the total
amount of each of the quantified metals collected in the sampling
train as follows:
Mt=(Mfh - Mfhb) + (Mbh - Mbhb) Eq. 29-3
where:
Mt=Total mass of each metal (separately stated for each metal)
collected in the sampling train, g.
Mfhb=Blank correction value for mass of metal detected in
front-half field reagent blank, g.
Mbhb=Blank correction value for mass of metal detected in back-
half field reagent blank, g.
8.4.3.1 If the measured blank value for the front half
(Mfhb) is in the range 0.0 to ``A'' g [where ``A''
g equals the value determined by multiplying 1.4
g/in.2 times the actual area in in.2 of the
sample filter], use Mfhb to correct the emission sample value
(Mfh); if Mfhb exceeds ``A'' g, use the greater
of I or II:
I. ``A'' g.
II. the lesser of (a) Mfhb, or (b) 5 percent of Mfh.
If the measured blank value for the black-half (Mbhb) is in
the range 0.0 to 1 g, use Mbhb to correct the emission
sample value (Mbh); if Mbhb) exceeds 1 g, use the
greater of I or II:
I. 1 g.
II. the lesser of (a) Mbhb or (b) 5 percent of Mbh.
8.5 Hg in Source Sample.
8.5.1 Analytical Fraction 1B; Front-Half Hg. Calculate the
amount of Hg collected in the front-half, Sample Fraction 1, of the
sampling train by using Equation 29-4:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP96.005
where:
Hgfh=Total mass of Hg collected in the front-half of the
sampling train (Sample Fraction 1), g.
Qfh=Quantity of Hg, g, TOTAL in the ALIQUOT of
Analytical Fraction 1B selected for digestion and analysis.
8.5.1.1 For example, if a 10 ml aliquot of Analytical Fraction
1B is taken and digested and analyzed (according to Section 5.4.3
and its NOTES Nos. 1 and 2), then calculate and use the total amount
of Hg in the 10 ml aliquot for Qfh.
Vsoln,1=Total volume of Analytical Fraction 1, ml.
Vf1B=Volume of aliquot of Analytical Fraction 1B analyzed, ml.
8.5.1.2 For example, if a 1 ml aliquot of Analytical Fraction
1B was diluted to 50 ml with 0.15 percent HNO3 as described in
Section 5.4.3 to bring it into the proper analytical range, and then
1 ml of that 50-ml wa digested according to Section 5.4.3 and
analyzed, Vf1B would be 0.02 ml.
8.5.2 Analytical Fractions 2B, 3A, 3B, and 3C; Back Half Hg.
8.5.2.1 Calculate the amount of Hg collected in Sample Fraction
2 by using Equation 29-5:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP96.006
where:
Hgbh2=Total mass of Hg collected in Sample Fraction 2,
g.
[[Page 18278]]
Qbh2=Quantity of Hg, g, TOTAL in the ALIQUOT of
Analytical Fraction 2B selected for digestion and analysis.
8.5.2.1.1 For example, if a 10 ml aliquot of Analytical
Fraction 2B is taken and digested and analyzed (according to Section
5.4.3 and its NOTES Nos. 1 and 2), then calculate and use the total
amount of Hg in the 10 ml aliquot for Qbh2.
Vsoln,2=Total volume of Sample Fraction 2, ml.
Vf2B=Volume of Analytical Fraction 2B analyzed, ml.
8.5.2.1.2 For example, if 1 ml of Analytical Fraction 2B was
diluted to 10 ml with 0.15 percent HNO3 as described in Section
5.4.3 to bring it into the proper analytical range, and then 5 ml of
that 10-ml was analyzed, Vf2B would be 0.5 ml.
8.5.2.2 Calculate each of the back-half Hg values for
Analytical Fractions 3A, 3B, and 3C by using Equation 29-6:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP96.007
where:
Hgbh3 (A,B,C)=Total mass of Hg collected separately in Fraction
3A, 3B, or 3C, g.
Qbh3 (A,B,C)=Quantity of Hg, g, TOTAL, separately, in
the ALIQUOT of Analytical Fraction 3A, 3B, and 3C selected for
digestion and analysis, (see previous notes in Sections 8.5.1 and
8.5.2 describing the quantity ``Q'' and calculate similarly).
Vf3 (A,B,C)=Volume, separately, of Analytical Fraction 3A, 3B,
or 3C analyzed, ml (see previous notes in Sections 8.5.1 and 8.5.2,
describing the quantity ``V'' and calculate similarly).
Vsoln, 3 (A,B,C)=Total volume, separately, of Analytical
Fraction 3A, 3B, or 3C, ml.
8.5.2.3 Calculate the total amount of Hg collected in the back-
half of the sampling train by using Equation 29-7:
Hgbh=Hgbh2+Hgbh3A+Hgbh3B+Hgbh3C Eq. 29-7
where:
Hgbh=Total mass of Hg collected in the back-half of the
sampling train, g.
8.5.3 Total Train Hg Catch. Calculate the total amount of Hg
collected in the sampling train by using Equation 29-8:
Hgt=(Hgfh-Hgfhb)+(Hgbh-Hgbhb) Eq. 29-8
where:
Hgt=Total mass of Hg collected in the sampling train,
g.
Hgfhb=Blank correction value for mass of Hg detected in front-
half field reagent blank, g.
Hgbhb=Blank correction value for mass of Hg detected in back-
half field reagent blanks, g.
8.5.4 If the total of the measured blank values
(Hgfhb+Hgbhb) is in the range of 0.0 to 0.6 g,
then use the total to correct the sample value
(Hgfh+Hgbh); if it exceeds 0.6 g, use the greater
of I. or II:
I. 0.6 g.
II. the lesser of (a) (Hgfhb+Hgbhb), or (b) 5 percent
of the sample value (Hgfh+Hgbh).
8.6 Individual Metal Concentrations in Stack Gas. Calculate the
concentration of each metal in the stack gas (dry basis, adjusted to
standard conditions) by using Equation 29-9:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP96.008
Cs=Concentration of a metal in the stack gas, mg/dscm.
K4=10-3 mg/g.
Mt=Total mass of that metal collected in the sampling train,
g; (substitute Hgt for Mt for the Hg
calculation).
Vm(std)=Volume of gas sample as measured by the dry gas meter,
corrected to dry standard conditions, dscm.
8.7 Isokinetic Variation and Acceptable Results. Same as Method
5, Sections 6.11 and 6.12, respectively.
9. Bibliography
1. Method 303F in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
Wastewater, 16th Edition, 1985. Available from the American Pubic
Health Association, 1015 18th Street NW., Washington, DC 20036.
2. EPA Methods 6010, 6020, 7000, 7041, 7060, 7131, 7421, 7470,
7740, and 7841, Tesdt Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste: Physical/
Chemical Methods. SW-846, Third Edition, September 1986, with
updates I, II, IIA and IIB. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC
20460.
3. EPA Method 200.7, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part
136, Appendix C. July 1, 1987.
4. EPA Methods 1 through 5, Code of Federal Regulations, Title
40, Part 60, Appendix A. July 1, 1991.
5. EPA Method 101A, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part
61, Appendix B. July 1, 1991.
PART 61--[AMENDED]
3. The authority citation for part 61 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7412, 7414, 7416, and 7601.
4. In part 61, Method 101A of appendix B, by revising the heading,
Sections 6.1.5, 7.2.1, 7.2.3, 7.2.5, 7.3.1., 7.3.2, 7.3.3, and 9.2; and
by adding sections 5.2.4 through 5.2.7, 6.1.7, 6.1.8, 7.2.1.1 through
7.2.1.3, 7.2.6, 9.2.1, 9.2.2 and reference 3 of item 10 bibliograph;
and by adding text to the end of section 6.1.6 to read as follows:
Appendix B--Test Methods
* * * * *
Method 101A--Determination of Particulate and Gaseous Mercury Emissions
From Stationary Sources
* * * * *
5.2.4 Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer or Equivalent. Any
atomic absorption unit with an open sample presentation area in
which to mount the optical cell is suitable. Use those instrument
settings recommended by the particular manufacturer. Instruments
designed specifically for the measurement of mercury using the cold-
vapor technique are commercially available and may be substituted
for the atomic absorption spectrophotometer.
5.2.5 Optical Cell. Alternatively, a heat lamp mounted above
the cell or a moisture trap installed upstream of the cell may be
used.
5.2.6 Aeration Cell. Alternatively, aeration cells available
with commercial cold vapor instrumentation may be used.
5.2.7 Aeration Gas Cylinder. Nitrogen, argon, or dry, Hg-free
air, equipped with a single-stage regulator. Alternatively, aeration
may be provided by a peristaltic metering pump. If a commercial cold
vapor instrument is used, follow the manufacturer's recommendations.
* * * * *
6.1.5 Sulfuric Acid (H2SO4), 10 Percent (V/V).
Carefully add and mix 100 ml of concentrated H2SO4 to 800
ml of deionized distilled water. Then, by adding deionized distilled
water, mix and bring to a final volume of 1000 ml.
6.1.6 * * *
Precaution: To prevent autocatalytic decomposition of the
permanganate solution, filter the solution through Whatman 541
filter paper. Also, due to the potential reaction of the potassium
permanganate with the acid, there could be pressure buildup in the
solution storage bottle; therefore these bottles shall not be fully
filled and shall be vented to relieve excess pressure and prevent
explosive potentials. Venting is required, but should not allow
contamination of the solution; a No. 70-72 hole drilled in the
container cap and Teflon liner has been used.
6.1.7 Hydrochloric Acid (HCL). Concentrated. Trace-metals grade
is recommended. The Hg level shall be less than 3 ng/ml.
6.1.8 HCL, 8 N. Dilute 67 ml of concentrated HCl to 100 ml with
water (slowly add the HCl to the water).
* * * * *
7.2.1 Container No. 1 (Impinger, Probe, and Filter Holder) and,
if applicable, No. 1A (HCl rinse).
7.2.1.1 Using a graduated cylinder, measure the liquid in the
first three
[[Page 18279]]
impingers to within 1 ml. Record the volume of liquid present (e.g.,
see Figure 5-3 of Method 5 in 40 CFR Part 60). This information is
required to calculate the moisture content of the effluent gas. (Use
only graduated cylinder and glass storage bottles that have been
precleaned as in Section 7.1.2.) Place the contents of the first
three impingers into a 1000-ml glass sample bottle labeled Container
No. 1. See the Precaution in Section 6.1.6.
Note No. 1 to Section 7.2.1.1: Due to the potential reaction of
KMnO4 with acid, there could be pressure buildup in the sample
storage bottles. These bottles shall not be filled completely and
shall be vented to relieve excess pressure. A No. 70-72 hole drilled
in the container cap and Teflon liner has been used successfully).
Note No. 2 to Section 7.2.1.1: If a filter is used in the
sampling train, remove the filter from its holder as outlined under
``Container No. 3'' below.)
7.2.1.2 Taking care that dust on the outside of the probe or
other exterior surfaces does not get into the sample, quantitatively
recover the Hg (and any condensate) from the probe nozzle, probe
fitting, probe liner, front half of the filter holder (if
applicable), and impingers as follows: Rinse these components with a
total of 250 to 400 ml of fresh acidified 4 percent KMnO4
solution carefully assuring removal of all loose particulate matter
from the impingers; add all washings to Container No. 1. See the
Precaution in Section 6.1.6 and see the Note No. 1 in Section
7.2.1.1. To remove any residual brown deposits on the glassware
following the permanganate rinse, rinse with approximately 100 ml of
water carefully assuring removal of all loose particulate matter
from the impingers, and add this rinse to Container No. 1. If no
visible deposits remain after this water rinse, do not rinse with 8
N HCl. However, if deposits do remain on the glassware after the
water rinse, wash the impinger walls and stems with a total of only
25 ml of 8 N HCl as follows; turn and shake the impingers so that
the 8 N HCl contacts all inside surfaces (wash the first impinger,
then pour the wash from the first impinger into the second impinger,
and finally pour the wash from the second into the third). DO NOT
PLACE THE HCl WASH INTO THE ACIDIFIED PERMANGANATE SOLUTION. Place
the HCl wash into a separate container labeled Container No. 1A as
follows: place 150 ml of water in an empty sample container labeled
Container No. 1A. Pour the HCl wash carefully, with stirring, into
Container No. 1A. Rinse the impinger walls and stem with a total of
50 ml of water, and place this rinse into Container No. 1A.
7.2.1.3 After all washings have been collected in the sample
containers, prepare as described above to prevent leakage during
shipment to the laboratory. Mark the height of the fluid level to
determine whether leakage occurs during transport. Label the
containers to identify their contents clearly.
7.2.3 Container No, 3 (Filter). If a filter was used, carefully
remove it from the filter holder, place it into a 100 ml glass
sample container, and add 20 to 40 ml of acidified KMnO4. If it
is necessary to fold the filter, be sure that the particulate cake
is inside the fold. Carefully transfer to the 100 ml sample bottle
any particulate matter and filter fibers that might adhere to the
filter holder gasket by using a dry Nylon bristle brush and a sharp
edged blade. See the Precaution in Section 6.1.6 and see the Note
No. 1 in Section 7.2.1.1. Label the container to clearly identify
its contents. Mark the height of the fluid level to determine
whether leakage occurs during transport.
* * * * *
7.2.5 Container No, 5 (Absorbing Solution Blank). For a blank,
place 500 ml of acidified absorbing solution in a 1000 ml sample
bottle. See the Precaution in Section 6.1.6 and see the Note No. 1
in Section 7.2.1.1.
7.2.6 Container No. 6 (HCl rinse blank). For a blank, place 200
ml of water in a 1000-ml sample bottle, and add 25 ml of 8 N HCl
carefully with stirring. Seal the container. Only one blank sample
per 3 runs is required.
* * * * *
7.3.1 Containers No. 3 and No. 4 (Filter and Filter Blank). If
a filter is used, place the contents, including the filter, of
Containers No. 3 and 4 in separate 250-ml beakers, and heat the
beakers on a steam bath until most of the liquid has evaporated. Do
not take to dryness. Add 20 ml of concentrated HNO3 to the
beakers, cover them with a watch glass, and heat on a hot plate at
70 deg.C for 2 hours. Remove from the hot plate. Filter the
solution from digestion of the Container No. 3 contents through
Whatman No. 40 filter paper, and save the filtrate for addition to
the Container No. 1 filtrate as described in Section 7.3.2. Discard
the filter. Filter the solution from the digestion of the Container
No. 4 contents through Whatman No. 40 filter paper, and save the
filtrate for addition to Container No. 5 filtrate as described in
Section 7.3.3. Discard the filter.
7.3.2 Container No. 1 (Impingers, Probe, and Filter Holder)
and, if applicable, No. 1A (HCl rinse). Filter the contents of
Container No. 1 through Whatman 40 filter paper into a 1-liter
volumetric flask to remove the brown MnO2 precipitate. Save the
filter for digestion of the brown MnO2 precipitate. Add the
sample filtrate from Container No. 3 to the 1-liter volumetric
flask, and dilute to volume with water. If the combined filtrates
are greater than 1000 ml, determine the volume to the nearest ml and
make the appropriate corrections for blank subtractions. Mix
thoroughly. Mark the combined filtrates as ANALYSIS SAMPLE No. A.1.
and analyze for Hg within 48 hr of the filtration step (Note: Do not
confuse ANALYSIS SAMPLE No. A.1. with the contents of field Sample
Container No. 1A which contains the 8 N HCl wash). Place the saved
filter, which was used to remove the brown MnO2 precipitate,
into an appropriate sized vented container, which will allow release
of any gases including chlorine formed when the filter is digested.
In a laboratory hood which will remove any gas produced by the
digestion of the MnO2, add 25 ml of 8 N HCl to the filter and
allow to digest for a minimum of 24 hours at room temperature.
Filter the contents of Container 1A through Whatman 40 paper into a
500-ml volumetric flask. Then filter the result of the digestion of
the brown MnO2 from Container No. 1 through Whatman 40 filter
into the same 500-ml volumetric flask, and dilute and mix well to
volume with water. Discard the filter. Mark this combined 500-ml
dilute solution as ANALYSIS SAMPLE No. HCL A.2., and analyze for Hg.
7.3.3 Container No. 5 (Absorbing Solution Blank) and No. 6 (HCl
Rinse Blank). Prepare the contents of Container No. 5 for analysis
by the same procedure used for Container No. 1 as described in
Section 7.3.2. Add the filter blank filtrate from Container No. 4 to
the 1-liter volumetric flask, and dilute to volume. Mix thoroughly.
Mark this as ANALYSIS SAMPLE No. A.1. BLANK, and analyze for Hg
within 48 hours of the filtration step. Digest any brown precipitate
remaining on the filter from the filtration of Container No. 5 by
the same procedure as described in Section 7.3.2. Filter the
contents of Container No. 6 by the same procedure as described in
Section 7.3.2, and combine in the 500-ml volumetric flask with the
filtrate from the digested blank MnO2 precipitate. Mark this
resultant 500-ml combined dilute solution as ANALYSIS SAMPLE No. HCl
A.2 blank. (Note: When analyzing samples A.1 blank and HCl A.2
blank, always begin with 10-ml aliquots. This applies specifically
to blank samples.)
* * * * *
9. * * *
9.2 Total Mercury. For each source sample, correct the average
maximum absorbance of the two consecutive samples whose peak heights
agree within 3 percent of their average for the contribution of the
blank. Then calculate the total Hg content in g in each
sample. Correct for any dilutions made to bring the sample into the
working range of the spectrophotometer.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP96.009
[[Page 18280]]
where:
m(HCl) Hg=Total blank corrected g of Hg in HCl rinse
and HCl digestate of filter sample
C(HCl) Hg=Total ng of Hg analyzed in the aliquot from the 500-
ml ANALYSIS SAMPLE No. HCl A.2.
C(HCl blk) Hg=Total ng of Hg analyzed in aliquot of the 500-ml
ANALYSIS SAMPLE No. HCl A.2 blank.
D.F.(HCl) Hg=Dilution factor for the HCl-digested Hg-containing
solution, ANALYSIS SAMPLE No. ``HCl A.2.'' This dilution factor
applies only to the dilution steps, if necessary, of the 500 ml of
the original sample volume [Vf (HCl)] of ``HCl A.2'' because
the original volume has been factored out in the equation along with
the sample aliquot (S). In Eq. 101A-1, the sample aliquot, S, is
digested according to Sections 7.4, 8.1, and 8.2 and the Hg from
this digestion is introduced directly into the aeration cell for
analysis. A dilution factor is required only if it is necessary to
bring the sample into the analytical instrument's calibration range.
If no dilution is necessary, then D.F. (HCl) Hg equals 1.0.
D.F. (HCl blk)Hg=Dilution factor for the HCl-digested Hg-containing
solution, ANALYSIS SAMPLE No. ``HCl A.2 blank.'' (Refer to sample
No. ``HCl A.2'' dilution factor information above.)
Vf(HCl)=Solution volume of original sample, 500 ml for the HCl
samples diluted as described in Section 7.3.
10-3=Conversion factor g/ng.
S=Aliquot volume of sample: digested according to Sections 7.4, 8.1,
8.2 and the Hg from this digestion is introduced directly into the
aeration cell for analysis, ml.
Sblk=Aliquot volume of blank: digested according to Sections
7.4, 8.1, and 8.2 and the Hg from this digestion is introduced
directly into the aeration cell for analysis, ml.
9.2.1 The maximum allowable blank subtraction for the Hg in the
HCl washes is the lesser of the two following values: (1) the actual
blank measured value (ANALYSIS SAMPLE NO. HCl A.2 blank), or (2) 5%
of the Hg content in the combined HCl rinse and digested sample
(ANALYSIS SAMPLE No. HCl A.2).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP96.010
where:
m(fltr)Hg=Total blank corrected g of Hg in KMnO4
filtrate and HNO3 digestion of filter sample.
C(fltr)Hg=Total ng of Hg in aliquot of KMnO4 filtrate and
HNO3 digestion of filter analyzed (aliquot of ANALYSIS SAMPLE
No. A.1).
C(fltr blk)Hg=Total ng of Hg analyzed in aliquot of KMnO4
blank and HNO3 digestion of blank filter (aliquot of ANALYSIS
SAMPLE No. A.1 blank).
Vf(fltr)=Solution volume of original sample, normally 100 ml
for samples diluted as described in Section 7.3.
Vf(blk)=Solution volume of blank sample, 1000 ml for samples
diluted as described in Section 7.3.
D.F.(fltr)Hg=Dilution factors, if necessary for ANALYSIS SAMPLE
No. A.1, calculated similarly to those above for the (HC1) Hg
samples.
D.F.(fltr blk)Hg=Dilution factors, if necessary for ANALYSIS
SAMPLE No. A.1 blank, calculated similarly to those above for the
(HCl blk)Hg samples.
9.2.2 The maximum allowable blank subtraction for the HCl is
the lesser of the two following values: (1) the actual blank
measured value (ANALYSIS SAMPLE No. ``A.1 blank''), or (2) 5% of the
Hg content in the filtrate (ANALYSIS SAMPLE No. ``A.1'').
mHg=m(HC1)Hg+m(fltr)Hg Eq. 101A-3
where:
mHg=Total blank corrected Hg content in each sample,
g.
m(HC1)Hg=Total blank corrected g of Hg in HCl rinse
and HCl digestate of filter sample.
M(fltr)Hg=Total blank corrected g of Hg in KMnO4
filtrate and HNO3 digestion of filter sample.
* * * * *
10. * * *
3. Wilshire, Frank W., J.E. Knoll, T.E. Ward, and M.R. Midgett.
Reliability Study of the U.S. EPA's Method 101A--Determiantion of
Particulate and Gaseous Mercury Emissions U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. Report No. 600/D-31/
219 AREAL 367, NTIS Acc No. PB91-23361.
* * * * *
5. In Appendix B to part 61, Method 101A is amended by revising
the second and last sentences of section 7.1.1 and by revising the
last two sentences of the first paragraph of section 7.1.2 to read
as follows:
Appendix B to Part 61--Test Methods
* * * * *
Method 101A Determination of Particulate and Gaseous Mercury Emissions
From Sewage Sludge Incinerators Meth. 101A
* * * * *
7.1.1 * * * In this method, highly oxidizable matter could make
it impossible to sample for the required minimum time.* * * In cases
where an excess of water condensation is encountered, collect two
runs to make one sample, or add an extra impinger in front of the
first impinger (also containing acidified KMnO4 solution).
7.2.1 * * * In this method, clean all the glass components (a
hood is recommended) by rinsing with 50 percent HNO3, tap
water, 8 N HCl, tap water, and finally deionized distilled water.
Then place 50 ml of the acidified 4 percent KMnO4 absorbing
solution in the first impinger and 100 ml in each of the second and
third impingers.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-9834 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-9794 Cable Television Service; List of Major Television Markets
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18291-18292]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9794]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 76
[CS Docket No. 95-139; DA 96-574]
Cable Television Service; List of Major Television Markets
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission, through this action, amends its rules
regarding the listing of major television markets, to change the
designation of the Raleigh-Durham-Goldsboro television market to
include the community of Fayetteville, North Carolina. This action,
taken at the request of Capital Cities/ABC, Inc., licensee of
television station WTVD(TV), channel 11, Durham, North Carolina;
Capitol Broadcasting Company, Inc., licensee of television station
WRAL(TV), channel 5, Raleigh, North Carolina; Delta Broadcasting, Inc.,
licensee of television station WKFT(TV), channel 40, Fayetteville,
North Carolina; FSF TV, Inc., licensee of television station WRDC(TV),
channel 28, Durham, North Carolina; and Paramount Stations Group of
Raleigh Durham Inc., licensee of television station WLFL(TV), channel
22, Raleigh, North Carolina and after evaluation of the comments filed
in this proceeding, amends the rules to
[[Page 18292]]
designate the subject market as the Raleigh-Durham-Goldsboro-
Fayetteville, North Carolina television market. With this action, this
proceeding is terminated.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 28, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vanessa Stallings, Cable Services
Bureau, (202) 416-0800.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's
Report and Order, Docket 95-139, adopted April 9, 1996 and released
April 15, 1996. The full text of this decision is available for
inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC
Reference Center (room 239), 1919 M Street NW., Washington, D.C. 20554,
and may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor,
International Transcription Service, (202) 857-3800, 1919 M Street NW.,
Washington, D.C. 20554.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 76
Cable television.
Federal Communications Commission.
William H. Johnson,
Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau.
Rule Changes
Part 76 of Chapter I of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations
is amended as follows:
PART 76--CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE
1. The authority citation for Part 76 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 2, 3, 4, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 324A, 48
Stat., as amended, 1064, 1065, 1066, 1081, 1082, 1083, 1084, 1085,
1101; 47 U.S.C. Secs. 152, 153, 154, 301, 303, 307, 308, 309, 532,
533, 535, 542, 543, 544A, 552 as amended, 106 Stat. 1460.
2. Section 76.51 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(73) to read
as follows:
Sec. 76.51 Major television markets.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(73) Raleigh-Durham-Goldsboro-Fayetteville, North Carolina.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-9794 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10288 Regulatory Reinvention; Streamlining of HUD's Regulations Implementing the Fair Housing Act; Correction
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18248-18249]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10288]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal
Opportunity
24 CFR Parts 100, 103, and 109
[Docket No. FR-4029-C-02]
RIN 2529-AA78
Regulatory Reinvention; Streamlining of HUD's Regulations
Implementing the Fair Housing Act; Correction
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal
Opportunity, HUD.
ACTION: Final rule, correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 1, 1996 (61 FR 14378), HUD published a final rule
streamlining its regulations implementing the Fair Housing Act. The
April 1, 1996 final rule implemented the Housing for Older Persons Act
of 1995 by substantively revising HUD's regulations governing housing
for persons 55 years of age or older. However, the final rule failed to
incorporate certain changes which HUD had determined were necessary.
The purpose of this document is to correct the April 1, 1996 final rule
by making the required amendments to HUD's regulations governing
housing for older persons. For the convenience of readers, HUD is re-
publishing the entire regulatory text of the April 1, 1996 final rule,
but incorporating the correction made by this document.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Forward, Deputy Assistant
[[Page 18249]]
Secretary for Enforcement and Investigations, Room 5106, Department of
Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC
20410, telephone number (202) 708-4211. For hearing- and speech-
impaired persons, this number may be accessed via TTY by calling the
Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339. (With the
exception of the ``800'' number, these numbers are not toll free.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 1, 1996 (61 FR 14378), HUD
published a final rule which, among other streamlining amendments,
implemented the Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995 (Pub.L. 104-76,
approved December 28, 1996). Specifically, the April 1, 1996 rule
merged 24 CFR 100.304 and 100.315, and revised Sec. 100.304 to track
the statutory language. In addition, the provisions describing the
``significant facilities and services'' requirement for ``55 or over''
housing in Secs. 100.305, 100.306, 100.307, 100.310, and 100.316, were
deleted to conform to the new requirements for ``55 or over'' housing
established by the Housing for Older Persons Act.
However, the April 1, 1996 final rule failed to incorporate certain
changes that HUD had determined were necessary. Revised Sec. 100.304
retained most of the substance of former 24 CFR 100.315(b)(4). This
provision concerned the ability of housing providers to meet the 80
percent occupancy requirement for ``55 or over'' housing by reserving
unoccupied units for occupancy by persons 55 years of age or older. HUD
had decided that removal of former 24 CFR 100.315(b)(4) was necessary
for complete and effective implementation of the Housing for Older
Persons Act. This document makes the necessary correction. For the
convenience of readers, HUD is re-publishing the entire regulatory text
of the April 1, 1996 final rule, but incorporating the correction made
by this document.
Accordingly, FR Doc. FR-4029-F-01, Regulatory Reinvention;
Streamlining of HUD's Regulations Implementing the Fair Housing Act,
published in the Federal Register on April 1, 1996 (61 FR 14378) is
corrected by re-publishing the regulatory text to read as follows:
PART 100--DISCRIMINATORY CONDUCT UNDER THE FAIR HOUSING ACT
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d), 3600-3619.
2. Section 100.304 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 100.304 55 or over housing.
(a) The provisions regarding familial status shall not apply to
housing intended and operated for occupancy by at least one person 55
years of age or older per unit pursuant to this section.
(b) In order to qualify as housing for older persons under this
section, at least 80 percent of the units in the housing facility must
be occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or older, except
that a newly constructed housing facility for first occupancy after
March 12, 1989, need not comply with this section until 25 percent of
the units in the facility are occupied.
(c) Housing satisfies the requirements of this section even though:
(1) On September 13, 1988, under 80 percent of the occupied units
in the housing facility are occupied by at least one person 55 years of
age or older per unit, provided that at least 80 percent of the units
that are occupied after September 13, 1988, are occupied by at least
one person 55 years of age or older.
(2) There are unoccupied units, provided that at least 80 percent
of the occupied units are occupied by at least one person 55 years of
age or older.
(3) There are units occupied by employees of the housing provider
(and family members residing in the same unit) who are under 55 years
of age, provided the employees perform substantial duties directly
related to the management or maintenance of the housing.
Secs. 100.305, 100.306, 100.307, 100.310, 100.315, and
100.316 [Removed]
3. Sections 100.305, 100.306, 100.307, 100.310, 100.315, and
100.316 are removed.
PART 103--FAIR HOUSING COMPLAINT PROCESSING
4. The authority citation for part 103 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d), 3600-3619.
5. Section 103.30 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 103.30 Form and content of complaint.
* * * * *
(b) The Assistant Secretary may require complaints to be made on
prescribed forms.
* * * * *
Sec. 103.105 [Amended]
6. Section 103.105 is amended by removing paragraph (a) and
removing the paragraph designation ``(b)'' from paragraph (b).
7. Section 103.110 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 103.110 Reactivation of referred complaints.
* * * * *
(c) The substantially equivalent State or local agency has failed
to commence proceedings with respect to the complaint within 30 days of
the date that it received the notification and referral of the
complaint; or the agency commenced proceedings within this 30-day
period, but the Assistant Secretary determines that the agency has
failed to carry the proceedings forward with reasonable promptness.
8. Section 103.225 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 103.225 Completion of investigation.
The investigation will remain open until a determination is made
under Sec. 103.400, or a conciliation agreement is executed and
approved under Sec. 103.310. Unless it is impracticable to do so, the
Assistant Secretary will complete the investigation of the alleged
discriminatory housing practice within 100 days of the filing of the
complaint (or where the Assistant Secretary reactivates the complaint,
within 100 days after service of the notice of reactivation under
Sec. 103.115). If the Assistant Secretary is unable to complete the
investigation within the 100-day period, HUD will notify the aggrieved
person and the respondent, by mail, of the reasons for the delay.
PART 109--[REMOVED]
9. Part 109 is removed.
Dated: April 17, 1996.
Elizabeth K. Julian,
Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity.
[FR Doc. 96-10288 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-28-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10285 Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner; Federal Manufactured Housing Program; Streamlining Final Rule; Correction
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18249-18250]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10285]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 3280
[Docket No. FR-4025-C-02]
RIN 2502-AG70
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing
Commissioner; Federal Manufactured Housing Program; Streamlining Final
Rule; Correction
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing
Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Correction to final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On March 15, 1996 (61 FR 10858), the Department published a
final rule streamlining its regulations under the National Manufactured
Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974. In part, this
final
[[Page 18250]]
rule removed part 3283 from the Code of Federal Regulations and made
related conforming changes in other provisions in the manufactured
housing regulations. However, one conforming change was inadvertently
omitted from the rule. Therefore, this correction revises Sec. 3280.3
in the manufactured housing regulations to delete a reference to part
3283, which was removed by the March 15 rule.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 25, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David R. Williamson, Director, Office
of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Room 5241, Washington, DC; telephone number: (202) 755-
4560 (this is not a toll-free number). For hearing- and speech-impaired
persons, this number may be accessed via TTY (text telephone) by
calling the Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Accordingly, FR Doc. 96-6163, Federal
Manufactured Housing Program; Streamlining Final Rule (FR-4025-F-01),
published on March 15, 1996, is corrected by adding the following
amendment in title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations:
PART 3280--MANUFACTURED HOME CONSTRUCTION AND SAFETY STANDARDS
1. The authority citations for part 3280 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 3535(d), 5403, and 5424.
2. Section 3280.3 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 3280.3 Manufactured home procedural and enforcement regulations
and consumer manual requirements.
A manufacturer must comply with the requirements of this part 3280,
part 3282 of this chapter, and 42 U.S.C. 5416.
Dated: April 19, 1996.
Camille E. Acevedo,
Assistant General Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. 96-10285 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-27-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10280 Requirement to Report Suspicious Transactions; Correction
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 18250]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10280]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
31 CFR Part 103
RIN 1506-AA13
Requirement to Report Suspicious Transactions; Correction
AGENCY: Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, Treasury.
ACTION: Correction to final regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains a correction to the final rule
requiring banks to file reports of suspicious transactions under the
Bank Secrecy Act, which was published Monday, February 5, 1996 (61 FR
4326).
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 25, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Klingman, Office of Financial
Institutions Policy, FinCEN (703) 905-3920; or Joseph M. Myers,
Attorney-Advisor, Office of Legal Counsel, FinCEN, at (703) 905-3590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The final regulations that are the subject of these corrections
require banks and other depository institutions to report to the
Department of the Treasury under the Bank Secrecy Act any suspicious
transactions relevant to possible violations of federal law or
regulation.
Need for Correction
As published, the final regulations contain an error which may
prove to be misleading and is in need of clarification.
Correction of Publication
Accordingly, the publication on February 5, 1996 of the final
regulations, which were the subject of FR Doc. 96-2272, is corrected as
follows:
Sec. 103.21 [Corrected]
3. On page 4332, in the second column, in Sec. 103.21, paragraph
(f), line 7, the word ``shall'' is corrected to read ``may''.
Dated: April 22, 1996.
Anna Fotias,
Alternate Federal Register Liaison Officer, Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network.
[FR Doc. 96-10280 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-03-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10279 Amendment to the Bank Secrecy Act Regulations Relating to Orders for Transmittals of Funds by Financial Institutions; Correction
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 18250]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10279]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
31 CFR Part 103
RIN 1506-AA17
Amendment to the Bank Secrecy Act Regulations Relating to Orders
for Transmittals of Funds by Financial Institutions; Correction
AGENCY: Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, Treasury.
ACTION: Correction to final regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to the final rule amending
the Bank Secrecy Act regulations relating to orders for transmittals of
funds by financial institutions, which was published Monday, April 1,
1996 (61 FR 14386).
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 28, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles D. Klingman, Office of
Financial Institutions Policy, at (703) 905-3920, or Joseph M. Myers,
Office of Legal Counsel, (703) 905-3590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The final regulations that are the subject of these corrections
amend the Bank Secrecy Act regulations relating to orders for
transmittals of funds by financial institutions.
Need for Correction
As published, the final regulations contain errors which may prove
to be misleading and are in need of clarification.
Correction of Publication
Accordingly, the publication on April 1, 1996 of the final
regulations, which were the subject of FR Doc. 96-7682, is corrected as
follows:
Sec. 103.33 [Corrected]
1. On page 14388, in the third column, in Sec. 103.33, paragraph
(g)(3) introductory text, line 7, the language ``transfer system by a
financial institution'' is corrected to read ``transfer system or
otherwise by a financial institution''.
2. On page 14388, in the third column, in Sec. 103.33, paragraph
(g)(3) introductory text, line 9, the language ``the Federal Reserve
Bank completes its'' is corrected to read ``the Federal Reserve Bank or
otherwise, completes its''.
Dated: April 22, 1996.
Anna Fotias,
Alternate Federal Register Liaison Officer, Financial Crimes
Enforcement Network.
[FR Doc. 96-10279 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-03-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10260 Karnal Bunt
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18233-18235]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10260]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 81 / Thursday, April 25, 1996 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 18233]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
7 CFR Part 301
[Docket No. 96-016-5]
Karnal Bunt
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Interim rule and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are amending the Karnal bunt regulations by adding Imperial
County, CA, and a portion of Riverside County, CA, to the list of areas
quarantined because of infestations of Karnal bunt. We are also adding
Tilletia indica (Mitra) Mundkur, the organism that causes Karnal bunt,
to the list of restricted articles. This action is necessary on an
emergency basis to prevent the artificial spread of Karnal bunt, a
serious fungal disease of wheat, durum wheat, and triticale, into
noninfected areas of the United States.
DATES: Interim rule effective April 19, 1996. Consideration will be
given only to comments received on or before June 24, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Please send an original and three copies of your comments to
Docket No. 96-016-5, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS,
suite 3C03, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale MD 20737-1238. Please
state that your comments refer to Docket No. 96-016-5. Comments
received may be inspected at USDA, room 1141, South Building, 14th
Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. Persons wishing to
inspect comments are requested to call ahead on (202) 690-2817 to
facilitate entry into the comment reading room.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Stephen Poe, Operations Officer,
Domestic and Emergency Operations, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit
134, Riverdale, MD 20732, (301) 734-8247.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Karnal bunt is a serious fungal disease of wheat (Triticum
aestivum), durum wheat (Triticum durum), and triticale (Triticum
aestivum X Seale cereals), a hybrid of wheat and rye. The disease is
caused by the smut fungus Tilletia indica (Mitra) Mundkur and is spread
by spores. Karnal bunt is a serious disease that affects both yield and
grain quality. It adversely affects the color, odor, and palatability
of flour and other foodstuffs made from affected grain. Grain
containing any amount of bunted kernels is reduced in quality. Karnal
bunt does not present a risk to human health.
On March 20, 1996, the Secretary of Agriculture signed a
``Declaration of Extraordinary Emergency'' authorizing the Secretary to
take emergency action under 7 U.S.C. 150dd with regard to Karnal bunt
within the States of Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. The ``Declaration
of Extraordinary Emergency'' was published in the Federal Register on
March 25, 1996 (61 FR 12058, Docket No. 96-016-1). On March 26, 1996,
the Secretary of Agriculture signed a ``Declaration of Emergency''
authorizing the transfer and use of funds within the Department for a
program to control Karnal bunt wherever it may be found in the United
States. The ``Declaration of Emergency'' was published in the Federal
Register on March 29, 1996 (61 FR 14046, Docket No. 96-016-2).
In an interim rule effective March 25, 1996, and published in the
Federal Register March 28, 1996 (61 FR 13649-13655, Docket No. 93-016-
3), we established the Karnal bunt regulations (7 CFR 301.89-1 through
301.89-11) and quarantined the State of Arizona and a total of six
counties in the States of New Mexico and Texas. The regulations impose
restrictions on the interstate movement of regulated articles from
quarantined areas in order to prevent the artificial spread of Karnal
bunt to noninfested areas of the United States.
Additions to Quarantined Areas
Recently, Karnal bunt was detected in lots of seed that were either
planted or stored in California. On April 12, 1996, the Secretary of
Agriculture signed a ``Declaration of Extraordinary Emergency''
authorizing the Secretary to take emergency action under 7 U.S.C. 150dd
with regard to Karnal bunt within California.
The regulations in Sec. 301.89-3 provide that the Administrator of
APHIS will quarantine each State, or portion of a State, that is
infected with Karnal bunt or that the Administrator considers necessary
to regulate due to its proximity to an infestation or its
inseparability from an infected locality for quarantine purposes.
In accordance with these criteria and the recent detection of
Karnal bunt in California, we are amending Sec. 301.89-3(e) by adding
all of Imperial County and a portion of Riverside County, CA, to the
list of quarantined areas.
The quarantined area in Riverside County, CA, is that portion of
the county in the Blythe and Ripley areas bounded by a line drawn as
follows: Beginning at the intersection of State Highway 62 and the
Riverside-San Bernardino County line, then east along the Riverside-San
Bernardino County line to its intersection with the California-Arizona
State line; then south along the California-Arizona State line to its
intersection with the Riverside-Imperial County line; then west along
the Riverside-Imperial County line to its intersection with Graham Pass
Road; then northeast along Graham Pass Road to its intersection with
Chuckwalla Valley Road; then west and northwest along Chuckwalla Valley
Road to its intersection with Interstate Highway 10; then west along
Interstate Highway 10 to its intersection with State Highway 177; then
northeast and north along State Highway 177 to its intersection with
State Highway 62; then northeast along State Highway 62 to the point of
beginning.
Addition of Regulated Article
Section 301.89-2 of the regulations lists articles whose movement
from quarantined areas is restricted due to the risk of spreading
Karnal bunt. In this interim rule, we are adding to the list of
regulated articles ``Tilletia indica (Mitra) Mundkur,'' the organism
that causes Karnal bunt.
[[Page 18234]]
Emergency Action
The Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
has determined that an emergency exists that warrants publication of
this interim rule without prior opportunity for public comment.
Immediate action is necessary to prevent the artificial spread of
Karnal bunt to noninfected areas of the United States.
Because prior notice and other public procedures with respect to
this action are impracticable and contrary to the public interest under
these conditions, we find good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553 to make it
effective upon signature. We will consider comments that are received
within 60 days of publication of this rule in the Federal Register.
After the comment period closes, we will publish another document in
the Federal Register. It will include a discussion of any comments we
receive and any amendments we are making to the rule as a result of the
comments.
Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. For this
action, the Office of Management and Budget has waived its review
process required by Executive Order 12866.
This action quarantines one entire county and a portion of another
county in California because of Karnal bunt and restricts the
interstate movement of regulated articles from those quarantined areas.
This action also adds Tilletia indica (Mitra) Mundkur to the list of
regulated articles. This emergency situation makes compliance with
section 603 and timely compliance with section 604 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604) impracticable. This rule may
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If we determine this is so, then we will discuss the issues
raised by section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act in our Final
Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis.
Executive Order 12372
This program/activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance under No. 10.025 and is subject to Executive Order 12372,
which required intergovernmental consultation with State and local
officials. (See 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V.)
Executive Order 12778
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12778, Civil
Justice Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State and local laws and
regulations that are inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no
retroactive effect; and (3) only requires administrative proceedings
before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule upon the
cancellation of a certificate, limited permit, or compliance agreement.
National Environmental Policy Act
An environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact
have been prepared for this rule. The assessment provides a basis for
the conclusion that the treatment of regulated articles, under the
conditions specified in this rule, will not have a significant impact
on the quality of the human environment. Based on the finding of no
significant impact, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service has determined that an environmental impact
statement need not be prepared.
The environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact
were prepared in accordance with: (1) The National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C 4321 et seq.), (2) Regulations on the
Council on Environmental Quality for implementing the procedural
provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), (3) USDA regulations
implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS' NEPA Implementing
Procedures (7 CFR part 372).
Copies of the environmental assessment and finding of no
significant impact are available for public inspection at USDA, room
1141, South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except holidays. Persons wishing to inspect copies are requested to
call ahead on (202) 690-2817 to facilitate entry into the reading room.
In addition, copies may be obtained by writing to the individual listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Paperwork Reduction Act
In accordance with section 3507(j) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the information collection and
recordkeeping requirements included in this interim rule have been
submitted for emergency approval to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). OMB has assigned control number 0579-0121 to the information
collection and recordkeeping requirements. Notwithstanding any other
provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall
any person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information, subject to the requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, unless that collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB Control Number. Please send written comments to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention: Desk
Officer for APHIS, Washington, DC 20503. Please state that your
comments refer to Docket No. 96-016-5. Please send a copy of your
comments to: (1) Docket No. 96-016-5, Regulatory Analysis and
Development, PPD, APHIS, suite 3C03, 4700 River Road Unit 118,
Riverdale, MD 20737-1238, and (2) Clearance Officer, OIRM, USDA, room
404-W, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250.
The paperwork associated with the Karnal bunt program will include
the completion of compliance agreements, certificates, and limited
permits. There will also be requests for inspections. We are soliciting
comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our
proposed information collection and recordkeeping requirements. We need
this outside input to help us accomplish the following:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of our agency's functions,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who
are to respond (such as through the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission responses).
Estimate of burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of
information is estimated to average 20 minutes per response.
Respondents: State plant regulatory officials, shippers, growers,
and representatives of the plant industry.
Estimated number of respondents: 1,915.
Estimated number of responses per respondent: 3.824.
Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 2,410 hours.
Copies of this information collection can be obtained from:
Clearance Officer, OIRM, USDA, room 404-W, 14th Street and Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250.
[[Page 18235]]
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 301
Agricultural commodities, Plant diseases and pests, Quarantine,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
PART 301--DOMESTIC QUARANTINE NOTICES
Accordingly, 7 CFR part 301 is amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 301 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 150bb, 150dd, 150ee, 150ff, 161, 162, and
164-167; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(c).
2. In Sec. 301.89-2, paragraphs (e) through (n) are redesignated as
paragraphs (f) through (o), respectively, and a new paragraph (e) is
added, as follows:
Sec. 301.89-2 Regulated articles.
* * * * *
(e) Tilletia indica (Mitra) Mundkur;
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 301.89-3, paragraph (e), the designation of quarantined
areas is amended by adding, in alphabetical order, entries for Imperial
County and Riverside County in California, as follows:
Sec. 301.89-3 Quarantined areas.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
* * * * *
California
Imperial County. The entire county.
Riverside County. That portion of Riverside County in the Blythe
and Ripley areas bounded by a line drawn as follows: Beginning at
the intersection of State Highway 62 and the Riverside-San
Bernardino County line, then east along the Riverside-San Bernardino
County line to its intersection with the California-Arizona State
line; then south along the California-Arizona State line to its
intersection with the Riverside-Imperial County line; then west
along the Riverside-Imperial County line to its intersection with
Graham Pass Road; then northeast along Graham Pass Road to its
intersection with Chuckwalla Valley Road; then west and northwest
along Chuckwalla Valley Road to its intersection with Interstate
Highway 10; then west along Interstate Highway 10 to its
intersection with State Highway 177; then northeast and north along
State Highway 177 to its intersection with State Highway 62; then
northeast along State Highway 62 to the point of beginning.
Done in Washington, DC, this 19th day of April, 1996.
Terry L. Medley,
Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 96-10260 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10255 Removal of Appendix to 33 CFR Subpart 1.07, List of Penalty Provisions Coast Guard Is Authorized To Enforce
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18250-18251]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10255]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 1
[CGD 96-010]
RIN 2115-AF30
Removal of Appendix to 33 CFR Subpart 1.07, List of Penalty
Provisions Coast Guard Is Authorized To Enforce
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
[[Page 18251]]
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: As part of the President's Regulatory Reinvention Initiative,
the Coast Guard is removing obsolete regulations. The Appendix to 33
CFR Subpart 1.07 is outdated. To avoid misleading the public with
outdated materials, the Coast Guard is removing the Appendix.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 25, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Unless otherwise indicated, documents referred to in this
preamble are available for inspection or copying at the office of the
Executive Secretary, Marine Safety Council (G-LRA/3406), U.S. Coast
Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street SW., room 3406, Washington D.C.
20593-0001 between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The telephone number is (202) 267-1477.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
LT Michele Bouziane, Staff Attorney, Maritime and International Law
Division, Office of Chief Counsel, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, (202)
267-0014.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background and Purpose
The Appendix to 33 CFR Subpart 1.07 lists penalty provisions of
statutes the Coast Guard is authorized to enforce. This includes
penalty provisions of laws that the Coast Guard enforces and
administers under this part. It also includes penalty provisions of
laws that another agency administers, but the Coast Guard enforces when
violations occur on the high seas and waters over which the United
States has jurisdiction. The Appendix also lists the penalty procedure
(civil or criminal) used by the Coast Guard to address violations of
each statute.
The Appendix was last updated in 1982. The Appendix, in its
outdated condition, is of little use and could be misleading. The Coast
Guard does not plan to update the index because the information it
contains is available elsewhere in statutes and regulations. To avoid
misleading the public with outdated materials, the Coast Guard is
removing the Appendix.
Regulatory Information
This rule is being published as a final rule without a prior notice
of proposed rulemaking. This rulemaking merely removes the Appendix to
33 CFR Subpart 1.07 and will not impose any substantive requirements on
the public. Therefore, the Coast Guard for good cause finds, under 5
U.S.C. 553 (b)(3)(B) and (d)(3), that notice and public comment
procedure are unnecessary, and that this rule may be made effective
upon publication.
Regulatory Evaluation
This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866 and does not require an assessment of
potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that order. It
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under that
order. It is not significant under the regulatory policies and
procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040;
February 26, 1979). The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this
rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph
10e of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the
Coast Guard must consider whether this rule will have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. ``Small
entities'' may include (1) small businesses and not-for-profit
organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields and (2) governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard has evaluated this
rule under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. This rule involves removing
the Appendix to 33 CFR Subpart 1.07 and will not have a substantive
impact on the public. Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Collection of Information
This proposal contains no collection-of-information requirements
under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Federalism
The Coast Guard has analyzed this rule under the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612 and has determined that
this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant
the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Environment
The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this rule
and concluded that, under paragraph 2.B.2 of Commandant Instruction
M16475.1B (as revised by 59 FR 38654, July 29, 1994), this rule is
categorically excluded from further environmental documentation. A
``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' is available in the docket for
inspection or copying where indicated under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects
33 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and procedure, Authority delegations
(Government agencies), Freedom of information, Penalties.
Subpart 1.07 Appendix [Removed]
Under the authority of 14 U.S.C. 633, the Appendix to 33 CFR
Subpart 1.07 is removed.
Dated: April 19, 1996.
Paul M. Blayney,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 96-10255 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-14-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10238 Accounting and Reporting Requirements
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18235-18236]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10238]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION
12 CFR Part 621
RIN 3052-AB54
Accounting and Reporting Requirements
AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Farm Credit Administration (FCA or Agency), by the Farm
Credit Administration Board (Board), adopts as final without change an
interim rule amending its regulations on high-risk assets. The interim
rule was adopted on November 17, 1994 (59 FR 60886, Nov. 29, 1994). The
interim rule reflected recent changes in generally accepted accounting
principles (GAAP) that supported retention of existing regulatory
guidance for Farm Credit System (System) institutions. Although the
need for immediate regulatory action did not permit a public comment
period before the interim rule took effect, the FCA requested post-
promulgation public comment on the interim rule. This final rule
addresses the comments received.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 15, 1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Linda C. Sherman, Policy Analyst, Regulation Development, Office of
Examination, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, VA 22102-5090, (703)
883-4498, TDD (703) 883-4444,
or
William L. Larsen, Senior Attorney, Regulatory Operations Division,
Office of General Counsel, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, VA
22102-5090, (703) 883-4020, TDD (703) 883-4444.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Substantial amendments to the FCA's regulations on Accounting and
Reporting Requirements at 12 CFR part 621 became effective on December
31, 1993. See 58 FR 48780, September 20, 1993. These regulations
include requirements and standards for institutions to use in
accounting for high-risk assets and disclosing loan performance
characteristics. The amendments promoted consistency with industry
practices in accounting and reporting and ensured that FCA regulatory
requirements and standards remained consistent with GAAP.
Subpart C of part 621 provides System institutions and FCA
examiners with clear guidance on how to categorize, account for,
report, and disclose the performance of high-risk assets. In
particular, the regulations provide specific criteria for placing loans
in nonaccrual status, for using cash basis versus cost recovery
accounting practices, for upgrading loans from nonaccrual to accrual
status, and for aggregating nonaccrual loans. The amended regulations
promote consistent financial reporting among System institutions and
Systemwide financial statements that are comparable to those of other
federally regulated financial institutions.
Subpart C was subject to a ``sunset'' provision when originally
adopted, because the FCA expected that aspects of subpart C guidance
might conflict with the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards (SFAS) No. 114 when they were later implemented by System
institutions.1 However, in October 1994, the Financial Accounting
Standards Board (FASB) amended SFAS No. 114 by adopting SFAS No.
118.2 SFAS No. 118 removed those elements of SFAS No. 114 that
would have conflicted with subpart C. As a result, the FCA decided to
retain subpart C. To ensure the elimination of the sunset provision
before it automatically rescinded subpart C at year-end 1994, the FCA
issued an interim rule with a request for public comment (59 FR 60886,
Nov. 29, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 114,
``Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan,'' an amendment
of SFAS Statement Nos. 5 and 15, dated May 1993, was subject to
mandatory implementation by institutions for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 1994.
\2\ Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 118,
``Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan--Income
Recognition and Disclosures,'' an amendment of FASB Statement No.
114, dated October 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Analysis of Public Comments
The FCA received one comment letter on the interim rule. The letter
was submitted by the Farm Credit Council (FCC) on behalf of its
membership, together with the Farm Credit System's Accounting Standards
Work Group under the direction of the Federal Farm Credit Banks Funding
Corporation.
The FCC recognizes the FCA's efforts to promote accounting and
financial reporting requirements consistent with the current practices
of commercial banks. However, reiterating arguments from their July 14,
1993 comment letter on the proposed rule, the FCC continues to express
concern about adopting specific accounting and financial reporting
rules rather than general guidelines. The FCC believes the regulations
should be broad enough to allow for evolutionary changes in GAAP and
notes that other regulators do not
[[Page 18236]]
include such specific rules in their regulations. They urge the FCA to
rescind the interim rule. Rescission would restore the sunset provision
and retroactively eliminate Secs. 621.6, 621.7, 621.8, 621.9 and 621.10
(subpart C).
The FCC bases its concern on the length of time necessary to amend
FCA regulations. The FCC warns that the presence of specific
requirements in the regulations could cause the System's financial
reporting process to conflict with GAAP because the FCA would not be
able to change its regulations quickly enough to remain current with
GAAP guidelines for the accounting and financial reporting of high-risk
assets. The FCC also points out that if the Agency were to lack a
quorum of its Board, as has occurred in the past, it would be
impossible to amend the regulations to be consistent with changes as
may be required by GAAP.
The FCA observes in response that the application of GAAP to
specific areas of accounting and financial reporting is not always well
defined. This has been especially true of high-risk asset accounting.
GAAP has not consistently provided specific authoritative guidance in
the area of problem loan accounting and reporting until recently. While
other financial institution regulators have addressed this issue by
instituting specific guidance in their call report instructions, the
FCA is addressing them in the accounting regulations. There is little
substantive difference between these two approaches. Both the Office of
the Comptroller of the Currency's (OCC) Call Report instructions and
the FCA's regulations are published in the Federal Register, and both
give the public an opportunity to provide comments prior to
implementation of the revised policy direction.
The FCA continues to believe that, in areas such as high-risk
accounting, the promulgation of regulations covering subjects not fully
addressed by GAAP can be an effective method of promoting consistent
accounting and reporting by System institutions. Since its adoption,
the final regulation has improved the internal consistency of System
financial disclosures regarding high-risk assets and made System
accounting and reporting for such assets more comparable to the
practices of the rest of the financial services industry. If GAAP
provides future guidance and direction that conflicts with FCA
regulations, the FCA agrees that it is important to respond to the
changes. The FCA believes that it can address any inconsistencies that
may develop between its regulations and GAAP in a timely fashion.
In support of its contention that the detailed nature of FCA
regulations might make it difficult for the FCA to keep up with
evolving trends in regulatory accounting guidance, the FCC notes two
apparent inconsistencies between FCA regulations and the approach taken
by other federal bank and thrift regulators. While not commenting
substantively on the provisions, the FCC suggests that more flexible
accounting and financial reporting guidelines would facilitate keeping
System financial reporting consistent with other financial
institutions. As noted, the FCA agrees with the broad goal of
accounting and reporting consistency between the System and other
financial institutions. However, in certain circumstances, the unique
needs of the System may require FCA guidance that may differ from the
approach of other regulators without affecting broad comparability of
System financial reporting. This is the case with respect to the two
examples of accounting and reporting guidance noted by the FCC.
First, the FCC notes that Sec. 621.9(a) requires all contractual
principal and interest due on the loan to be paid and the loan to be
current before returning a nonaccrual loan to accrual status. The FCC
compares this to guidance by other financial institution regulators
that would permit institutions to return past due loans to accrual
status if they are ``reasonably assured of repayment within a
reasonable time period.'' 3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Joint Statement of the OCC, Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, Federal Reserve Board, and Office of Thrift Supervision
titled ``Revised Interagency Guidance on Returning Nonaccrual Loans
to Accrual Status'' issued June 10, 1993.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FCA believes that any nonaccrual loan must demonstrate
performance in order to be reinstated to accrual status. An essential
demonstration of performance is that the loan be brought current. Under
the final regulation, this must occur before an institution can resume
interest accrual on that asset. However, the regulation also states
that ``[o]nce the ultimate collectibility of the recorded investment is
no longer in doubt, payments received in cash on such loan may qualify
for recognition as interest income,'' (i.e., cash basis accounting) if
certain characteristics are met at the time the payment is received.
Therefore, application of FCA's regulation results in an accounting
treatment of income recognition on such assets similar to that allowed
by the other financial institution regulators.
In a second example, the FCC states that the OCC allows for cash
basis interest income recognition on nonaccrual loans with partial
charge-offs before complete recovery of the charge-off. The FCC notes
that this differs from the requirement in Sec. 621.8 that interest
income cannot be recognized on a nonaccrual loan with an unrecovered
partial charge-off. The FCA believes that applying loan payments to
recover partial charge-offs prior to recording interest income is a
prudent and appropriate approach to eliminating doubt as to the loan's
ultimate collectibility and is not inconsistent with GAAP. In addition,
this requirement is mitigated by an exception in cases where the prior
charge-off was taken as part of a formal restructuring of the loan. The
FCA believes this approach is justified for this type of asset in light
of the unique structure of the System and its concentration of credit
in limited agricultural markets. Moreover, any differences in income
recognition between the FCA and the OCC requirements are likely to be
temporary if the loan continues to perform.
For the reasons stated in the interim rule release, supplemented by
the above analysis and discussion, the FCA Board adopts the interim
rule amending 12 CFR part 621, which was published at 59 FR 60886 on
November 29, 1994, as final without change. The effective date of this
rule remains December 15, 1994. The FCA will continue to follow closely
any further developments under GAAP in the area of problem loan
accounting and reporting and will adjust its requirements as necessary.
Dated: April 19, 1996.
Floyd F. Fithian,
Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.
[FR Doc. 96-10238 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6705-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10237 List of Communities Eligible for the Sale of Flood Insurance
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18287-18289]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10237]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
44 CFR Part 64
[Docket No. FEMA-7639]
List of Communities Eligible for the Sale of Flood Insurance
AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule identifies communities participating in the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). These communities have applied to the
program and have agreed to enact certain floodplain management
measures. The communities' participation in the program authorizes the
sale of flood insurance to owners of property located in the
communities listed.
EFFECTIVE DATES: The dates listed in the third column of the table.
ADDRESSES: Flood insurance policies for property located in the
communities listed can be obtained from any licensed property insurance
agent or broker serving the eligible community, or from the NFIP at:
Post Office Box 6464, Rockville, MD 20849, (800) 638-6620.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert F. Shea, Jr., Division
Director, Program Implementation Division, Mitigation Directorate, 500
C Street SW., room 417, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3619.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP enables property owners to purchase
flood insurance which is generally not otherwise available. In return,
communities agree to adopt and administer local floodplain management
measures aimed at protecting lives and new construction from future
flooding. Since the communities on the attached list have recently
entered the NFIP, subsidized flood insurance is now available for
property in the community.
In addition, the Director of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency has identified the special flood hazard areas in some of these
communities by publishing a Flood Hazard Boundary Map (FHBM) or Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The date of the flood map, if one has been
published, is indicated
[[Page 18288]]
in the fourth column of the table. In the communities listed where a
flood map has been published, Section 102 of the Flood Disaster
Protection Act of 1973, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4012(a), requires the
purchase of flood insurance as a condition of Federal or federally
related financial assistance for acquisition or construction of
buildings in the special flood hazard areas shown on the map.
The Director finds that the delayed effective dates would be
contrary to the public interest. The Director also finds that notice
and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and
unnecessary.
National Environmental Policy Act
This rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR
Part 10, Environmental Considerations. No environmental impact
assessment has been prepared.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Acting Associate Director certifies that this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U. S. C.
601 et seq., because the rule creates no additional burden, but lists
those communities eligible for the sale of flood insurance.
Regulatory Classification
This final rule is not a significant regulatory action under the
criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30,
1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not involve any collection of information for
purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Executive Order 12612, Federalism
This rule involves no policies that have federalism implications
under Executive Order 12612, Federalism, October 26, 1987, 3 CFR, 1987
Comp., p. 252.
Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets the applicable standards of section 2(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12778, October 25, 1991, 56 FR 55195, 3 CFR, 1991
Comp., p. 309.
List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64
Flood insurance, Floodplains.
Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is amended as follows:
PART 64--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 64 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., Reorganization Plan No. 3 of
1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR,
1979 Comp., p. 376.
Sec. 64.6 [Amended]
2. The tables published under the authority of Sec. 64.6 are
amended as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Community Effective date of
State/location No. eligibility Current effective map date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Eligibles--Emergency Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michigan: Green, charter township of, 260951 Mar. 11, 1996
Mecosta County.
New York: Victor, village of, Ontario 361648 Mar. 12, 1996
County.
Nebraska:
Nuckolls County, unincorporated 310461 Mar. 20, 1996
areas.
Thayer County, unincorporated areas 310479 ......do.................. ..............................
Texas: Angelina County, unincorporated 480007 Mar. 29, 1996............. May 22, 1979.
areas.
Michigan: Reading, township of, 260410 Mar. 27, 1996............. Oct. 28, 1977.
Hillsdale County.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Eligibles--Regular Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mississippi: Itawamba County, 280290 Mar. 12, 1996............. Sept. 4, 1991.
unincorporated areas.
Illinois: Crawford County, 170939 Mar. 14, 1996............. June 3, 1986.
unincorporated areas.
Florida:
Ebro, town of, Washington County... 120629 Mar. 19, 1996............. June 17, 1991.
Esto, town of, Holmes County....... 120630 ......do.................. Dec. 5, 1990.
Noma, town of, Holmes County....... 120631 ......do.................. Do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reinstatements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania: White Oak, borough of, 420089 Jan. 30, 1975, Emerg; Oct. 4, 1995.
Allegheny County. Sept. 14, 1979, Reg; Oct.
4, 1995, Susp; Mar. 8,
1996 Rein.
New York:
Plainfield, town of, Otsego County. 361278 May 13, 1977, Emerg; Nov. Nov. 4, 1983.
4, 1983 Reg; Nov. 4, 1992
Susp; Mar. 12, 1996 Rein.
Taylor, town of, Cortland County... 361330 May 19, 1977, Emerg; May May 15, 1985.
15, 1985 Reg; June 15,
1988 Susp; Mar. 12, 1996
Rein.
Pennsylvania: West Mifflin, borough of, 420085 Aug. 7, 1974, Emerg; Feb. Oct. 4, 1995.
Allegheny County. 15, 1980, Reg; Oct. 4,
1995, Susp; Mar. 13,
1996, Rein.
Florida: Ponce de Leon, town of, Holmes 120117 Oct. 30, 1975, Emerg; Dec. 5, 1990.
County. Dec. 5, 1990, Reg; Dec.
5, 1990, Susp; Mar. 19,
1996, Rein.
Minnesota: St. Vincent, city of, 270232 Dec. 17, 1974, Emerg; Sept. 2, 1982.
Kittson County. Sept. 2, 1982, Reg; June
2, 1994, Susp; Mar. 19,
1996, Rein.
[[Page 18289]]
West Virginia: Newburg, town of, 540268 June 9, 1975, Emerg; Aug. Aug. 1, 1987.
Preston County. 1, 1987, Reg; Aug. 1,
1987, Susp; Mar. 19,
1996, Rein.
New York: Leicester, village of, 361456 Sept. 15, 1980, Emerg; Aug. 27, 1982.
Livingston County. Aug. 27, 1982, Reg; June
15, 1988, Susp; Mar. 21,
1996 Rein.
West Virginia: Paw Paw, town of, Morgan 540252 Oct. 2, 1975, Emerg; Nov. Mar. 5, 1996.
County. 2, 1984, Reg; Mar. 5,
1996, Susp; Mar. 22,
1996, Rein.
Nebraska: Elgin, city of, Antelope 310002 Apr. 18, 1975, Emerg; June June 17, 1986.
County. 17, 1986, Reg; June 17,
1986, Susp; Mar. 29,
1996, Rein.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regular Program Conversions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region VI
Texas: Terrell, city of, Kaufman County 480416 Mar. 4, 1996, Suspension Mar. 4, 1996.
Withdrawn.
Region II
New York: Clarence, town of, Erie 360232 Mar. 5, 1996,Suspension Mar. 5, 1996.
County. Withdrawn.
Region III
Pennsylvania: North Charleroi, borough 422137 ......do.................. Do.
of, Washington County.
West Virginia:
Bath, town of, Morgan County....... 540005 ......do.................. Do.
Morgan County, unincorporated areas 540144 ......do.................. Do.
Region V
Indiana: Tipton, city of, Tipton County 180255 ......do.................. Do.
Michigan:
Plymouth, city of, Wayne County.... 260236 ......do.................. Jan. 5, 1996.
Plymouth, charter township of, 260237 ......do.................. Do.
Wayne County.
Minnesota:
Aitkin County, unincorporated areas 270628 ......do.................. Feb. 2, 1996.
Hopkins, city of, Hennepin County.. 270166 ......do.................. Dec. 19, 1995.
Wisconsin:
Cadott, village of, Chippewa County 550043 ......do.................. Mar. 5, 1996.
Dane County, unincorporated areas.. 550077 ......do.................. Do.
Madison, city of, Dane County...... 550083 ......do.................. Do.
Middleton, city of, Dane County.... 550087 ......do.................. Do.
Region VI
Louisiana: Duson, town of, Lafayette 220104 ......do.................. Feb. 2, 1996.
County.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice--New Eligible--Regular Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Township of Pembina, North Dakota is participating in the Regular Program under Pembina County's
application effective March 12, 1996. Pembina County's Community Identification Number is 380079.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code for reading third column: Emerg.--Emergency; Reg.--Regular; Rein.--Reinstatement; Susp.--Suspension; With.--
Withdrawn.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 83.100, ``Flood
Insurance.'')
Issued: April 18, 1996.
Richard W. Krimm,
Acting Associate Director, Mitigation Directorate.
[FR Doc. 96-10237 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6718-05-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10210 Airworthiness Directives; Saab Model SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B Series Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18242-18245]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10210]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 96-NM-74-AD; Amendment 39-9582; AD 96-01-04 R1]
Airworthiness Directives; Saab Model SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B
Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment revises an existing airworthiness directive
(AD), applicable to certain Saab Model SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B series
airplanes, that currently requires revising the Airplane Flight Manual
(AFM) to require verification that the auto-ignition system is
operational; to define icing conditions at higher ambient temperatures;
and to provide the flight crew with limitations and procedures to aid
in the avoidance of engine power interruptions. The actions specified
by that AD are intended to prevent failure of the auto-ignition system
to re-light the engine in the event of power interruptions due to the
ingestion of ice and/or slush into the engine, which could result in
engine flameout and subsequent shutdown, and to provide the flight crew
with guidance to aid in avoidance of such occurrences. This amendment
clarifies certain requirements of the AFM revision. This amendment is
prompted by communications received from affected operators that
certain of the current requirements of the AD are unclear.
DATES: Effective May 10, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before June 24, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 96-NM-74-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056.
This information may be examined at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite
700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ruth E. Harder, Aerospace Engineer,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206)
227-1721; fax (206) 227-1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 2, 1996, the FAA issued
airworthiness directive (AD) 96-01-04, amendment 39-9480 (61 FR 511,
January 8, 1996), which is applicable to certain Saab Model SAAB SF340A
and SAAB 340B series airplanes. That AD requires revising the FAA-
approved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to:
1. Require verification that the auto-ignition system is
operational;
2. Define icing conditions at higher ambient temperatures; and
3. Povide the flight crew with limitations and procedures to aid in
the avoidance of engine power interruptions.
That AD action was prompted by a report of complete power loss of
the left engine and power fluctuations on the right engine as a result
of build up of ice and/or slush in the engine inlet and subsequent
ingestion into the engines. The actions required by that AD are
intended to prevent failure of the auto-ignition system to re-light the
engine in the event of power interruptions due to the ingestion of ice
and/or slush into the engine, which could result in engine flameout and
subsequent shutdown, and to provide the flight crew with guidance to
aid in avoidance of such occurrences.
[[Page 18243]]
Since the issuance of that AD, the FAA has received communications
from the Swedish airworthiness authority, Luftfartsverket (LFV), and
various affected operators indicating that certain text of the AFM
revision as cited in AD 96-01-04 is not clear.
Request to Clarify Frequency of Checks
Affected operators specifically request that the frequency of the
auto-ignition system checks, as specified in the AFM revision contained
in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of AD 96-01-04, be clarified. As AD 96-
01-04 was worded, some operators may have misinterpreted its
requirements to mean that the engine must be shut down following each
flight and restarted before the next flight.
The FAA finds that clarification is necessary to prevent such
misinterpretation. The FAA did not intend that the AD require shutdown
of the engine following each flight. The FAA acknowledges that some
operators may elect not to shut down the engine following each flight.
In such a case, this AD does not require that a check of the auto-
ignition system be performed. Therefore, the FAA has determined that
the limitations specified in paragraph (a)(1) and (a)(2) of AD 96-01-04
must be revised to clarify that the check of the auto-ignition system
is required prior to each engine start and during each engine shutdown.
Request to Clarify Relationship of AD to MMEL
The LFV noted that the AFM revision specified in paragraphs (a)(1)
and (a)(2) of AD 96-01-04 may imply that dispatch may occur
indefinitely with an inoperative auto-ignition system.
The FAA finds that clarification of this point is necessary. The
intent of AD 96-01-04 was that, if the auto-ignition system is found to
be inoperative, dispatch should be accomplished in accordance with the
Minimum Master Equipment List (MMEL). The FAA finds that the addition
of that information to the AFM revision specified in paragraphs (a)(1)
and (a)(2) of this AD will clarify the dispatch requirements.
Request to Clarify Definition of ``Icing Conditions''
For systems other than engine anti-ice activation, affected
operators request that a separate and relieving definition of ``Icing
Conditions'' of Outside Air Temperature (OAT) or Static Air Temperature
(SAT) be included in paragraph (a)(3) of the AD, with the OAT or SAT
criteria to be specified as +5 degrees Centigrade (C).
The FAA agrees that the definition of ``Icing Conditions'' needs to
be clarified for systems other than engine anti-ice. The FAA finds that
paragraph (a)(3) of the AD must be revised to expand the definition of
``Icing Conditions'' by including a separate definition for all
airplane operations other than engine anti-ice, which specifies the OAT
or SAT criteria as +5 degrees C.
Conclusion
Based on the issues raised by the affected operators and the LFV,
the FAA finds that AD 96-01-04 must be revised as discussed previously.
These revisions will ensure that the requirements of the AD are
understood clearly. Clearer understanding will ensure that the intent
of the AD is met and that the addressed unsafe condition is prevented.
Explanation of the Revised Rule
This airplane model is manufactured in Sweden and is type
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of
section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and
the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement.
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other airplanes of the same type design registered
in the United States, this AD revises AD 96-01-04 to continue to
require verification that the auto-ignition system is operational; to
define icing conditions at higher
[[Page 18244]]
ambient temperatures for engine anti-ice systems; and to provide the
flight crew with limitations and procedures to aid in the avoidance of
engine power interruptions. For Model SAAB 340B series airplanes having
an auto-ignition system that is found to be inoperative, this AD also
continues to require a test of the Np overspeed system to ensure that
it is operative, and repair, if necessary.
In addition, this AD revises the AFM revision by:
1. Clarifying the times at which the auto-ignition checks are to be
performed;
2. Specifying that the dispatch with the auto-ignition system
inoperative shall be done in accordance with the current MMEL; and
3. Providing a relieving definition of Icing Conditions for systems
other than engine anti-ice.
This is to be considered interim action until final action is
identified, at which time the FAA may consider further rulemaking.
Effective Date of the Revised Rule
Since a situation exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this regulation, it is found that notice and opportunity for prior
public comment hereon are impracticable, and that good cause exists for
making this amendment effective in less than 30 days.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting flight safety and, thus, was not preceded by
notice and an opportunity for public comment, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified under the caption ``ADDRESSES''.
All communications received on or before the closing date for comments
will be considered, and this rule may be amended in light of the
comments received. Factual information that supports the commenter's
ideas and suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating the
effectiveness of the AD action and determining whether additional
rulemaking action would be needed.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the
Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that
summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this
AD will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 96-NM-74-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Regulatory Impact
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency
regulation that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe
condition in aircraft, and that it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866. It has been determined further
that this action involves an emergency regulation under DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is
determined that this emergency regulation otherwise would be
significant under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures, a final
regulatory evaluation will be prepared and placed in the Rules Docket.
A copy of it, if filed, may be obtained from the Rules Docket at the
location provided under the caption ``ADDRESSES''.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing amendment 39-9480 (61 FR
511, January 8, 1996), and by adding a new airworthiness directive
(AD), amendment 39-9582, to read as follows:
96-01-04 R1 SAAB Aircraft AB: Amendment 39-9582. Docket 96-NM-74-
AD. Revises AD 96-01-04, Amendment 39-9480.
Applicability: Model SAAB SF340A series airplanes, serial
numbers 004 through 159 inclusive; and Model SAAB 340B series
airplanes, serial numbers 160 and subsequent; certificated in any
category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (c) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent failure of the auto-ignition system to re-light the
engine in the event of power interruptions due to the ingestion of
ice and/or slush into the engine, which could result in engine
flameout and subsequent shutdown; and to provide the flight crew
with guidance to aid in avoidance of such occurrences; accomplish
the following:
(a) Within 10 days after the effective date of this AD, revise
the FAA-approved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to include the text
contained in paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(4) of this
AD, as applicable. This may be accomplished by inserting a copy of
this AD into the AFM.
(1) For Model SAAB SF340A series airplanes: Insert the following
sub-section in the Limitations Section of the AFM:
``IGNITION SYSTEM
Prior to each engine start, perform a check of the auto-ignition
system.
Select batteries ON (external power ON or OFF).
Check that IGN switches are in NORM position.
Advance PLs above FLT IDLE and verify the IGN lights in
the Flight Status Panel (FSP) illuminate. In bright sunlight, shade
FSP to ensure IGN lights are visible when illuminated.
Retard PLs to GND IDLE. (IGN lights should go out.)
If an IGN light fails to illuminate when PLs are above
FLT IDLE, the auto-ignition system is considered to be inoperative.
If the auto-ignition system is inoperative:
BEFORE ENTERING ICING CONDITIONS, SET IGNITION TO CONT.
Maintain ignition in CONT until touchdown, even if icing conditions
cease to exist.
[[Page 18245]]
The obligation to comply with the current version of
the Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL), Revision 11, or later
approved revisions is not affected by this limitation.''
(2) For Model SAAB 340B series airplanes: Insert the following
sub-section in the Limitations Section of the AFM:
``IGNITION SYSTEM
During each engine shutdown, perform a check of the auto-
ignition system.
Adjust Ng to approximately 75%-77%; minimum is 75%.
Shut down the engines (CL to FUEL OFF).
Verify the IGN lights in the Flight Status Panel (FSP)
illuminate while Ng is above 62%. In bright sunlight, shade the FSP
to ensure that lights are visible when illuminated.
If an IGN light fails to illuminate, the auto-ignition
system is considered to be inoperative.
Retard PLs to GND IDLE.
If the auto-ignition system is inoperative:
BEFORE ENTERING ICING CONDITIONS, SET IGNITION TO CONT.
Maintain ignition in CONT until touchdown, even if icing conditions
cease to exist.''
The obligation to comply with the current version of
the Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL), Revision 11, or later
approved revisions is not affected by this limitation.
(3) For all airplanes: Insert the following in the Limitations
Section of the AFM, under Icing Conditions:
``For engine anti-ice system activation, icing conditions exist
when visible moisture in any form is present (such as clouds, fog
with visibility of one mile or less, rain, snow, sleet, ice
crystals) or standing water, slush, or snow (hard packed snow
excluded) is present on the ramps, taxiways, or runways and the OAT
or SAT is +10 degrees C and below during ground and flight
operation.
For all airplane operations other than engine anti-ice, icing
conditions exist when visible moisture in any form is present (such
as clouds, fog with visibility of one mile or less, rain, snow,
sleet, ice crystals) or standing water, slush, or snow (hard packed
snow excluded) is present on the ramps, taxiways or runways and the
OAT or SAT is +5 degrees C and below during ground and flight
operation. ``
(4) For all airplanes: Insert the following in the Normal
Procedures Section of the AFM, under Operation in Icing Conditions:
``CAUTION
Engine power interruptions may occur at ISA to ISA +20 degrees
Celsius temperature and in light (or undetected) icing conditions,
or shortly after exiting these conditions. Engine function will
normally be recovered by the auto-ignition system before any serious
loss of power. To aid in avoidance of these occurrences:
Engine anti-ice systems must be activated prior to
entering icing conditions, and maintained ON for at least 5 minutes
after exiting icing conditions.''
(b) For Model SAAB 340B series airplanes: If an auto-ignition
system is found to be inoperative, prior to further flight, perform
an Np overspeed test to ensure that the Np overspeed system is
operative, in accordance with the procedures specified in General
Electric Maintenance Manual SEI-576. If the Np overspeed system is
found to be inoperative, prior to further flight, repair in
accordance with the procedures specified in General Electric
Maintenance Manual SEI-576.
(c) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM-113,
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall submit their
requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector,
who may add comments and then send it to the Manager,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
(d) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(e ) This amendment becomes effective on May 10, 1996.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 19, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-10210 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10209 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 757 Series Airplanes Equipped With Moog Spoiler Actuators
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18238-18242]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10209]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 96-NM-75-AD; Amendment 39-9581; AD 96-09-07]
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 757 Series Airplanes
Equipped With Moog Spoiler Actuators
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes an existing airworthiness directive
(AD) that is applicable to Boeing Model 757 series airplanes equipped
with certain Abex spoiler actuator electro-hydraulic servo valves
(EHSV) installed in certain spoiler actuators. The existing AD
currently requires a one-time inspection of the spoiler actuator to
determine if a suspect EHSV is incorrectly installed, and replacement
of the EHSV, if necessary. That amendment was prompted by reports that
a bias spring in the EHSV of certain spoiler actuators was found to be
incorrectly installed. The actions specified by that AD are intended to
prevent a significant control upset of the airplane as a result of
problems associated with an incorrectly installed EHSV in the spoiler
actuator assembly. This amendment adds additional suspect EHSV's that
require inspection; it also corrects the actuator manufacturer's name
and corrects the serial number of one EHSV.
DATES: Effective May 10, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before June 24, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 96-NM-75-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056.
Information concerning this AD action may be examined at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don Eiford, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington;
telephone (206) 227-2788; fax (206) 227-1181.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 5, 1996, the FAA issued AD 96-
06-01, amendment 39-9537 (61 FR 9607, March 11, 1996), which is
applicable to Boeing Model 757 series airplanes equipped with
certain electro hydraulic servo valves (EHSV) installed in certain
spoiler actuators. That AD requires a one-time inspection of the
EHSV on the spoiler actuator to determine if a suspect valve is
incorrectly installed; if so, the EHSV must be replaced. That
action was prompted by reports that a bias spring in the EHSV of
certain spoiler actuators was found to be incorrectly installed.
If the jet pipe in the first stage of the EHSV is plugged, or if
the differential pressure between the extend and retract ports
pressurized by the jet pipe is inadequate, an incorrectly installed
bias spring on the second stage spool would cause the spoiler to be
driven into the ``deploy'' position. Such inadvertent spoiler
deployment would result in the airplane experiencing a rolling moment.
If the airplane is already banked or is at a low altitude, or if the
crew does not respond rapidly enough to control the uncommanded roll, a
significant control upset of the airplane could result. The actions
required by AD 96-06-01 are intended to prevent the occurrence of such
a control upset.
New Data Since Issuance of AD 96-06-01
Since the issuance of that AD, the manufacturer has provided the
FAA with data indicating that additional suspect EHSV's may be
installed on the affected airplanes. These suspect EHSV's have serial
numbers of 595, 563, and 909. If any these EHSV's are installed on an
airplane, there is the potential for the occurrence of the same unsafe
condition that was addressed by AD 96-06-01.
Explanation of New AD
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other airplanes of this same type design, this AD
supersedes AD 96-06-01 to require a one-time inspection of the spoiler
actuator to determine if a suspect EHSV is incorrectly installed, and
replacement of the EHSV, if necessary. This AD requires the inspection
for and removal of three additional suspect EHSV's.
Additionally, action is taken throughout this AD to specify the
correct names of the manufacturers of the spoiler actuator and the
EHSV. The subject spoiler actuators are manufactured by Moog; the
subject EHSV's are manufactured by Abex.
Table 1 of this AD has been corrected to indicate that the order
numbers are ``Abex'' order numbers, rather than ``Boeing'' order
numbers.
Due to a typographical error, EHSV serial number ``559'' was
incorrectly listed in Table 1 of AD 96-06-01 as serial number ``569.''
This AD corrects that error.
Cost Impact
According to the records of the EHSV manufacturer, all of the
affected EHSV's were shipped to be installed on Model 757 series
airplanes that currently are operated by non-U.S. operators under
foreign registry. None of the Model 757 series airplanes affected by
this action are on the U.S. Register; therefore, they are not directly
affected by this AD action. However, the FAA considers that this rule
is necessary to ensure that the unsafe condition is addressed in the
event that:
1. any of the subject airplanes are imported and placed on the U.S.
Register in the future; or
[[Page 18239]]
2. any one of the suspect EHSV's is installed on a U.S.-registered
airplane in the the future.
Should an affected airplane be placed on the U.S. Register in the
future, it would require approximately 1 work hour to accomplish the
required actions, at an average labor charge of $60 per work hour.
Based on these figures, the cost impact of this AD would be $60 per
airplane.
Conclusion
Since this AD action does not affect any airplane that is currently
on the U.S. register, it has no adverse economic impact and imposes no
additional burden on any person. Therefore, notice and public
procedures hereon are unnecessary and the amendment may be made
effective in less than 30 days after publication in the Federal
Register.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule and was not
preceded by notice and opportunity for public comment, comments are
invited on this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this
rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may
desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number and be
submitted in triplicate to the address specified under the caption
ADDRESSES. All communications received on or before the closing date
for comments will be considered, and this rule may be amended in light
of the comments received. Factual information that supports the
commenter's ideas and suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating
the effectiveness of the AD action and determining whether additional
rulemaking action would be needed.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the
Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that
summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this
AD will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 96-NM-75-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866;
(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) will not have a
significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial
number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing amendment 39-9537 (61 FR
9607, March 11, 1996), and by adding a new airworthiness directive
(AD), amendment 39-9581, to read as follows:
96-09-07 Boeing: Amendment 39-9581. Docket 96-NM-75-AD. Supersedes
AD 96-06-01, Amendment 39-9537.
Applicability: Model 757 airplanes, certificated in any
category, that are equipped with Moog spoiler actuators having Abex
electro-hydraulic servo valves (EHSV), part number 72196, with the
serial numbers listed in Table 1 of this AD:
Table 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abex order
EHSV serial No. No.*- Shipment Date *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AH-0001........................ C716657- 8 November 1991.
AH-0002-....................... C716657- 8 November 1991.
AH-0003-....................... C727995- 25 August 1994.
AH-0004........................ C727995- 25 August 1994.
AH-0005-....................... C727995- 25 August 1995.
AH-0006-....................... C727995- 25 August 1995.
AH-0007-....................... C727995- 25 August 1995.
13-............................ C731181- 12 June 1995.
49-............................ C730878- 01 June 1995.
61-............................ C727955- 13 September 1994.
131-........................... C708905- 13 November 89.
233-........................... C727730- 17 June 1994.
241-........................... C731540- 13 September 1995.
260-........................... C727955- 13 September 1994.
279-........................... C728298- 02 September 1994.
275-........................... C727880- 24 June 1994.
308-........................... C725421- 01 December 1993.
329-........................... C727711- 17 June 1994.
347-........................... C727518- 14 June 1994.
401-........................... C728298- 05 September 1994.
407-........................... C727730- 17 June 1994.
427-........................... C731181- 03 July 1995.
450-........................... C731181- 03 July 1995.
445-........................... C706627- 22 February 89.
457-........................... C731663- 12 September 1995.
456-........................... C728887- 28 November 1994.
463-........................... C731435- 21 August 1995.
484-........................... C727748- 22 June 1994.
515-........................... C727745- 24 June 1994.
559-........................... C728290- 05 September 1994.
563-........................... C724224- 14 September 1993.
579-........................... C724176- 14 September 1993.
595-........................... C727735- 24 January 1994.
611-........................... C727955- 14 September 1994.
607-........................... C727997- 20 July 1994.
647-........................... C728459- 10 October 1994.
726-........................... C731096- 04 September 1995.
725-........................... C729525- 19 December 1994.
819-........................... C728135- 03 August 1994.
890-........................... C726803- 06 April 1994.
874-........................... C730890- 26 April 1995.
909-........................... C724877- 29 November 1993.
912-........................... C727977- 04 August 1994.
991-........................... C713602- 10 December 1990.
998-........................... C731477- 4 September 1995.
1022........................... C708905- 13 November 1989.
1023........................... C708905- 13 November 1989.
1072........................... C709166- 14 November 1989.
1148........................... C730192- 13 March 1995.
1175........................... C723278- 05 August 1993.
1227........................... C728303- 31 August 1994.
1283........................... C731833- 04 September 1995.
1487........................... C728549- 04 October 1994.
1655........................... C728442- 28 November 1994.
1780........................... C726757- 06 April 1994.
1807........................... C728669 29 September 1994.
1862........................... C727625- 17 June 1994.
1929........................... C727977- 04 August 1994.
1986Z.......................... C727730- 17 June 1994.
2017Z.......................... C725411- 24 November 1993.
[[Page 18240]]
2034........................... C727730- 17 June 1994.
2073........................... C731272- 12 September 1995.
2125........................... C725713- 12 January 1994.
2220........................... C729735 29 March 1995.
2334........................... C727730- 17 June 1994.
2348........................... C727730- 17 June 1994.
2426........................... C731623 12 July 1995.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The Abex Order Number and Shipment Date are included in this listing
to enable operators to review their records in order to determine if a
suspect EHSV has been ordered, and if, or where, it has been installed
on an airplane.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (b) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent a significant control upset of the airplane due to
problems associated with incorrectly assembled Abex electro-
hydraulic servo valves (EHSV) on certain Moog spoiler actuators,
accomplish the following:
(a) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, perform
the following procedure: -
(1) While the airplane is on the ground, extend the flaps to 40
degrees. and visually inspect the spoiler actuator EHSV assembly to
determine the location of the second stage bias spring end cap
assembly.
(2) If the second stage bias spring cap assembly is on the aft
or lower side of the EHSV assembly, prior to further flight, replace
the EHSV, having Abex part number 72196, with a serviceable unit in
accordance with the airplane maintenance manual.
Note 2: To be correctly positioned, the second stage bias spring
cap assembly should be on the upper or forward side of the EHSV
assembly. Appendix 1 of this AD provides a visual representation of
the correct positioning of the EHSV assembly.
(b) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall
submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the
Manager, Seattle ACO.
Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Seattle ACO.
(c) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(d) This amendment becomes effective on May 10, 1996.
Billing Code 4910-13-P
[[Page 18241]]
Appendix 1
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25AP96.011
[[Page 18242]]
Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 19, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-10209 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10207 Right-of-Way Program Administration; Removal of Obsolete and Redundant Regulations
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18245-18247]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10207]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 18246]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
23 CFR Parts 710, 712, 720, and 740
[FHWA Docket No. 95-18]
RIN 2125-AC17
Right-of-Way Program Administration; Removal of Obsolete and
Redundant Regulations
AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.
ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document removes regulations concerning right-of-way
program administration which are obsolete and/or redundant. This action
is in response to the President's Regulatory Reinvention Initiative.
The removed regulatory provisions are duplicated or addressed elsewhere
in FHWA/DOT regulations or are unnecessary for current programs.
DATES: This interim rule is effective May 28, 1996. Comments are due on
or before June 24, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit written, signed comments to FHWA Docket No. 95-18,
Federal Highway Administration, Room 4232, HCC-10, Office of the Chief
Counsel, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 20590. All comments
received will be available for examination at the above address between
8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. Those desiring notification of receipt of comments must
include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Robert A. Johnson, Office of Real Estate Services, (202) 366-2020,
or Mr. Reid Alsop, Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, HCC-31, (202)
366-1371. Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 6, 1995, the FHWA published in
the Federal Register (60 FR 56004) an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking (ANPRM) requesting comment on the content of 23 CFR parts
710 through 740. Twenty comments were received from individuals (2),
private groups or organizations (2), and State transportation agencies
(16).
Based on the responses to the ANPRM and other factors, the FHWA
concludes that a comprehensive revision of the Right-of-Way related
regulations is required. While such a revision is appropriate, several
other regulatory revisions are currently underway that will, either
directly or indirectly, affect right-of-way considerations. The FHWA
will coordinate development of a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
governing right-of-way/real estate programs with other related
regulations now under review governing new administrative procedures
and environmental issues to ensure that maximum consistency with
current practice is achieved.
In the interim, the FHWA has identified numerous provisions that
are no longer needed and should be removed from the regulations. Four
whole parts or subparts identified during the review of the regulations
as no longer needed are removed by this rule. These four include:
(1) 23 CFR part 710, subpart D--Civil Rights. This subpart of the
regulations contains provisions relating civil rights under Title VI of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to the right-of-way acquisition function.
This subpart was published in 1974 and was based on provisions
contained in 49 CFR part 21 issued in 1970. Since the original
issuance, subchapter C--Civil Rights was added to 23 CFR. Subchapter C
provides guidance and policy for implementing Title VI program
requirements throughout FHWA and addresses State highway agency
responsibilities in this regard. The provisions in 49 CFR part 21 and
23 CFR subchapter C contain the more current provisions relating to
Civil Rights matters and are the sections of the regulations used to
assess compliance. The older provisions in 23 CFR part 710, subpart D,
while still relevant as guidance, are no longer needed, having been
replaced by the more comprehensive provisions in 23 CFR subchapter C.
(2) 23 CFR part 712, subpart H--Land Service Facilities. This
subpart contains policy guidance on Federal participation associated
with land service facilities designed for access to properties affected
by a highway improvement. The full control of access features
associated with the Interstate system, along with the cost-to-complete
funding basis for that system, necessitated regulations to assure that
land service facilities (construction items) incorporated in project
design were either clearly beneficial to the public or economically
justified if beneficial solely to an individual property owner. The
policy had existed as guidelines prior to adoption as a regulation in
1977, and has since been adopted within most State highway agencies
design development processes. The FHWA recognizes that most States now
have policies meeting the basic intent of this subpart. Current funding
programs are no longer based on cost-to-complete but are limited to
fixed allocations. Our program emphasis is not directed at new limited
access facilities. Therefore, no current interest is served by
retaining this subpart.
(3) 23 CFR part 720--Appraisal. The content in this part covers
employment and contracting provisions for acquiring agencies using fee
appraiser and specialist services. The current content in this part is
the residual portion of regulations originally issued in 1973 that
covered appraisal documentation and contracting standards. The
appraisal documentation standards were incorporated into 49 CFR part 24
in 1989 as part of the effort to develop a single government-wide rule
implementing the Uniform Act (Pub. L. 91-646). The employment and
contracting provisions contained in this part, while still considered
good practice, are no longer needed to address our current programs.
States have developed their own set of procedures on how to handle
contracting for services under government-wide rules issued by OMB as
implemented within DOT by 49 CFR part 18.
(4) 23 CFR part 740--Relocation Assistance. This part of the
regulations is a residual of a larger set originally issued in 1976
governing the implementation of the relocation program under the
Uniform Act. The main portion of the regulations related to this topic
was incorporated in 49 CFR part 24 in 1989. What was retained at that
time was participation, organization and contracting requirements. The
contracting provisions found in this part are no longer appropriate as
they either duplicate similar provisions found elsewhere in 23 CFR or
can be addressed through implementation of the government-wide rules on
contracting for services covered by 49 CFR part 18. The participation
and organizational sections in this part are also either covered
elsewhere in 23 CFR or no longer relate to current programs.
The removal of the above parts and subparts is not considered a
major or significant change in the basic programs of FHWA and should
not be considered as a relaxation of preexisting standards, or an
expansion of Federal participation limits that pertained to the
subjects contained therein. The removal is solely to reduce redundancy
and eliminate prescriptive portions of existing regulations that have
been adopted as standardized procedures over time by State highway
agencies.
[[Page 18247]]
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
The FHWA is waiving prior notice and opportunity for public comment
on this rule because it is considered unnecessary within the meaning of
section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 USC
553(b)(3)(B). Removal of the identified sections is unlikely to
engender public comment. The FHWA believes that the promulgation of
this interim rule will eliminate obsolete provisions in the CFR
enhancing the ease with which these regulations can be understood by
the public. Nevertheless, the FHWA is opening a public docket for this
rule and providing 60 days for receipt of public comment. The FHWA will
consider all comments received during this 60 day period in determining
whether any revision is necessary to the rule published today.
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
The FHWA has determined that this action is not a significant
regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 or
significant within the meaning of Department of Transportation
regulatory policies and procedures. Since this Interim Final Rule
reduces obsolete regulatory language it will not have an adverse annual
effect on the economy, interfere with the work of another agency,
materially alter the budget impact of grantees, or raise novel legal or
policy issues inconsistent with the principles set forth in this
Executive Order. It is anticipated that the economic impact of this
rulemaking will be minimal; therefore, a full regulatory evaluation is
not required.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This rule eliminates obsolete regulatory language used in the
administration of right-of-way programs, and in so doing does not add
to the burdens imposed on a substantial number of small entities.
Executive Order 12612 (Federalism Assessment)
This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined
that this action does not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a federalism assessment.
Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 20.205 Highway
Planning and Construction. The regulations implementing Executive Order
12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and
activities apply to this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not contain a collection of information
requirement for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
National Environmental Policy Act
The agency has analyzed this action for the purpose of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has
determined that this action would not have any effect on the quality of
the environment.
Regulation Identification Number
A regulation identification number (RIN) is assigned to each
regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations.
The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda
in April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of
this document can be used to cross reference this action with the
Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 23 CFR Parts 710, 712, 720, and 740
Grant programs--transportation, Highways and roads, Real property
acquisition, Relocation assistance, Rights-of-way.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, and under the authority of
23 U.S.C. 315 and 49 CFR 1.48, title 23, Code of Federal Regulations,
is amended as set forth below.
Issued on: April 18, 1996.
Rodney E. Slater,
Federal Highway Administrator.
In consideration of the foregoing, the FHWA amends chapter I of
title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 710--RIGHT-OF-WAY--GENERAL
1. The authority citation for part 710 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101(a) and 315; 42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.,
4633, 4651-4655; 49 CFR 1.48 (b) and (cc) and parts 21 and 24; 23
CFR 1.32.
Secs. 710.401 through 710.405 (Subpart D)--Civil Rights [Removed]
2. In part 710, subpart D, consisting of Secs. 710.401 through
710.405, is removed.
PART 712--THE ACQUISITION FUNCTION
3. The authority citation for part 712 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101(a), 107, 108, 111, 114, 204, 210, 308,
315, 317, and 323; 42 U.S.C. 2000d-1, 4633, 4651-4655; 49 CFR 1.48
(b) and (cc) and part 24; 23 CFR 1.32.
Secs. 712.801, 712.803, and 712.805 (Subpart H)--Land Service
Facilities [Removed]
4. In part 712, subpart H, consisting of Secs. 712.801, 712.803,
and 712.805 is removed.
PART 720--APPRAISAL [REMOVED]
5. Part 720 of chapter I is removed.
PART 740--RELOCATION ASSISTANCE [REMOVED]
6. Part 740 of chapter I is removed.
[FR Doc. 96-10207 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10169 Implementation of Sections 204(a) and 204(c) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Broadcast License Renewal Procedures)
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18289-18291]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10169]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR PARTS 1 and 73
[FCC 96-172]
Implementation of Sections 204(a) and 204(c) of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Broadcast License Renewal Procedures)
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final Rule,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission is implementing Sections 204(a) and 204(c) of
the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which eliminate comparative renewal
hearings for broadcast applications filed after May 1, 1995 and direct
the Commission to grant a broadcaster's renewal application if
statutory renewal standards are met. The action is necessary in order
to conform the Commission's rules to Section 204(a) and (c) of the
Telecommunications Act, and the intended effect of the action is to
conform the rules to those statutory provisions.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 25, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mania K. Baghdadi, Mass Media Bureau,
Policy and Rules Division (202) 418-2130.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Order
(In the Matter of Implementation of Sections 204(a) and 204(c) of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Broadcast Renewal Procedures)), adopted
April 12, 1996, and released April 12, 1996. The complete text of this
Order is available for inspection and copying during normal business
hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW.,
Washington, DC, and also may be purchased from the Commission's copy
contractor, International Transcription Service, (202) 857-3800, 2100 M
Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.
Synopsis of Order
1. This Order implements Sections 204(a) and 204(c) of the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 (``Telecom Act'') [Pub. L. No. 104-104,
[[Page 18290]]
110 Stat. 56 (1996)], which adopts new Section 309(k) of the
Communications Act applicable to broadcast renewal applications filed
after May 1, 1995, eliminating comparative renewal hearings,
establishing instead a new two-step renewal procedure, and directing
the Commission to grant a broadcaster's renewal application if
statutory renewal standards are met.
2. New Section 309(k) states:
(1) * * * If the licensee of a broadcast station submits an
application to the Commission for renewal of such license, the
Commission shall grant the application if it finds, with respect to
that station, during the preceding term of its license--
(A) the station has served the public interest, convenience, and
necessity;
(B) there have been no serious violations by the licensee of this
Act or the rules and regulations of the Commission; and
(C) there have been no other violations by the licensee of this Act
or the rules and regulations of the Commission which, taken together,
would constitute a pattern of abuse.
(2) * * * If any licensee of a broadcast station fails to meet the
requirements of this subsection, the Commission may deny the
application for renewal in accordance with paragraph (3), or grant such
application on terms and conditions as are appropriate, including
renewal for a term less than the maximum otherwise permitted.
(3) * * * If the Commission determines, after notice and
opportunity for a hearing as provided in subsection (e), that a
licensee has failed to meet the requirements specified in paragraph (1)
and that no mitigating factors justify the imposition of lesser
sanctions, the Commission shall--
(A) issue an order denying the renewal application filed by such
licensee under Section 308; and
(B) only thereafter accept and consider such applications for a
construction permit as may be filed under section 308 specifying the
channel or broadcasting facilities of the former licensee.
(4) * * * In making the determinations specified in paragraph (1)
or (2), the Commission shall not consider whether the public interest,
convenience, and necessity might be served by the grant of a license to
a person other than the renewal applicant.
47 U.S.C. Sec. 309(k).
3. Additionally, Section 204(a)(2) of the Telecom Act amends
Section 309(d) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. Sec. 309(d), to
make the standard for filing petitions to deny conform to the statutory
renewal standards. Thus, the statutory renewal standards are made
applicable to the petitioner's required showing and the Commission's
consequent findings in the case of a petition to deny a renewal
application filed after the statutory effective date.
4. The Telecom Act does not define the terms contained in the
renewal standards embodied in Section 309(k), and we likewise do not
define those terms in the Order. It is our present intent to continue
to apply existing policy statements and case law, refining these as
appropriate on a case-by-case basis, in interpreting the statutory
terms that govern the new renewal process. If we determine at some
future time that further clarification is appropriate, we shall conduct
such proceedings as may be warranted.
5. Administrative Matters. We are revising the rules as detailed
below without providing prior notice and an opportunity for comment.
For applications filed after May 1, 1995, the revisions simply reflect
the changes mandated by the applicable provisions of the Telecom Act
eliminating comparative renewals and codifying certain renewal
standards. We find that notice and comment procedures are unnecessary,
and that this action therefore falls within the ``good cause''
exception of the Administrative Procedure Act (``APA''). See 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B) (notice requirements inapplicable ``when the agency for good
cause . . . finds that notice and public procedure thereon are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest''). We
further find for the same reasons that good cause exists to make the
rule changes adopted herein effective upon publication of this Order in
the Federal Register. See id. at 553(d)(3). The rule changes adopted in
this Order do not involve discretionary action by the Commission.
Rather, they simply reiterate in our rules specific terms set forth in
legislation. Additionally, with respect to the revisions that involve
rules of agency organization and procedure, the notice and comment
requirements of the APA are inapplicable. See 5 U.S.C. Sec. 553(b)(A).
6. Termination of Comparative Renewal Rule Making. In light of the
elimination of the comparative renewal procedure, we will terminate BC
Docket No. 81-742, in which the Commission is considering reforming the
comparative renewal process. See Third Further Notice of Inquiry and
Notice of Proposed Rule Making in BC Docket No. 81-742, 4 FCC Rcd 6363
(1989) [57 FR 35357 (August 25, 1989]) and preceding Notices of Inquiry
and Notice of Proposed Rule Making cited therein. We believe that it
would not represent the most productive use of our resources to
conclude Docket No. 81-742 since it will apply only to a limited number
of comparative renewal proceedings.
7. Effective Dates. Pursuant to the Telecom Act, Section 309(k)
will be applied to renewal applications filed after May 1, 1995, and
the rule changes made to implement the new renewal provisions of the
Telecom Act reflect the statutory effective date. Pending comparative
renewal proceedings and mutual exclusivities involving applications
filed on or before May 1, 1995 will be concluded pursuant to the
current rules, and accordingly, we will leave intact procedural
provisions of the current rules that refer to comparative renewal
proceedings until those pending proceedings and exclusivities are
finally resolved. We wish to reiterate that our failure to amend or
eliminate a rule that refers to or applies to comparative renewal
proceedings results only from the need to conclude those ongoing
proceedings. We wish to make clear that applications filed on or before
May 1, 1995 will be subject to our current renewal standards and
procedures, while applications filed after May 1, 1995 will be subject
to the new renewal provisions adopted in Section 204 of the Telecom
Act.
8. Ordering Clause. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to
Section 204 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and to Sections 4(i)
and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934 as amended, 47 U.S.C.
Secs. 154(i), 303(r), Parts 1 and 73 of the Commission's Rules is
amended as set forth below. The rule changes are effective upon
publication of this Order in the Federal Register. IT IS FURTHER
ORDERED that BC Docket No. 81-742 is hereby terminated.
List of Subjects
47 CFR Part 1
Radio, Television.
47 CFR Part 73
Radio broadcasting, Television broadcasting.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
Rule Changes
Parts 1 and 73 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations are
amended as follows:
[[Page 18291]]
PART 1--PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
1. The authority citation for Part 1 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 303 and 309(j) unless otherwise
noted.
2. Section 1.227 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(6) to read as
follows:
Sec. 1.227 Consolidations.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(6) An application which is mutually exclusive with an application
for renewal of license of a broadcast station filed on or before May 1,
1995 will be designated for comparative hearing with such license
renewal application if it is substantially complete and tendered for
filing no later than the date prescribed in Sec. 73.3516(e).
PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES
3. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 154, 303, 304.
4. Section 73.561 is amended by revising the last sentence of the
introductory text of paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 73.561 Operating schedule; time sharing.
* * * * *
(b) * * * In order to be considered for this purpose, such an
application to share time must be filed no later than the deadline for
filing petitions to deny the renewal application of the existing
licensee, or, in the case of renewal applications filed by the existing
licensee on or before May 1, 1995, no later than the deadline for
filing applications in conflict with the such renewal applications.
* * * * *
5. Section 73.1020 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 73.1020 Station license period.
* * * * *
(b) For the cutoff date for the filing of applications mutually
exclusive with renewal applications that are filed on or before May 1,
1995 and for the deadline for filing petitions to deny renewal
applications, see Sec. 73.3516(e).
6. Section 73.3516 is amended by revising the introductory text of
paragraph (e) and paragraph (e)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 73.3516 Specification of facilities.
* * * * *
(e) An application for construction permit for a new broadcast
station or for modification of construction permit or license of a
previously authorized broadcast station will not be accepted for filing
if it is mutually exclusive with an application for renewal of license
of an existing broadcast station unless the application for renewal of
license is filed on or before May 1, 1995 and unless the mutually
exclusive construction permit application is tendered for filing by the
end of the first day of the last full calendar month of the expiring
license term. A petition to deny an application for renewal of license
of an existing broadcast station will be considered as timely filed if
it is tendered for filing by the end of the first day of the last full
calendar month of the expiring license term.
(1) If the license renewal application is not timely filed as
prescribed in Sec. 73.3539, the deadline for filing petitions to deny
thereto is the 90th day after the FCC gives public notice that it has
accepted the late-filed renewal application for filing. In the case of
a renewal application filed on or before May 1, 1995, if the license
renewal application is not timely filed as prescribed in Sec. 73.3539,
the deadline for filing applications mutually exclusive therewith is
the 90th day after the FCC gives public notice that it has accepted the
late-filed renewal application for filing.
* * * * *
7. Section 73.3523 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 73.3523 Dismissal of applications in renewal proceedings.
(a) An applicant for construction permit, that has filed an
application that is mutually exclusive with an application for renewal
of a license of an AM, FM or television station (hereinafter competing
applicant'') filed on or before May 1, 1995, and seeks to dismiss or
withdraw its application and thereby remove a conflict between
applications pending before the Commission, must obtain the approval of
the Commission.
* * * * *
8. Section 73.3584 is amended by revising the third sentence of
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 73.3584 Procedure for filing petitions to deny.
(a) * * * In the case of applications for renewal of license,
Petitions to Deny may be filed at any time up to the deadline
established in Sec. 73.3516(e). * * *
* * * * *
9. Section 73.3591 is amended by revising the introductory text of
paragraph (a), paragraph (c), and adding new paragraph (d) to read as
follows.
Sec. 73.3591 Grants without hearing.
(a) Except for renewal applications filed after May 1, 1995 which
will be subject to paragraph (d) of this section, in the case of any
application for an instrument of authorization, other than a license
pursuant to a construction permit, the FCC will make the grant if it
finds (on the basis of the application, the pleadings filed or other
matters which it may officially notice) that the application presents
no substantial and material question of fact and meets the following
requirements:
* * * * *
(c) If a petition to deny the application has been filed in
accordance with Sec. 73.3584 and the FCC makes the grant in accordance
with paragraph (a) of this section, the FCC will deny the petition and
issue a concise statement setting forth the reasons for denial and
disposing of all substantial issues raised by the petition.
(d) Renewal applications filed after May 1, 1995 will be governed
by the criteria established in 47 U.S.C. Sec. 309(k).
[FR Doc. 96-10169 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10132 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; States of Kansas and Missouri
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18251-18255]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10132]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[KS-6-1-6985, MO-31-1-7153; FRL 5448-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; States of
Kansas and Missouri
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: By this action the EPA gives full approval to the State
Implementation Plans (SIP) submitted by the states of Kansas and
Missouri to fulfill the emission inventory update requirement of the
approved Kansas City maintenance plan. The submittals also establish a
motor vehicle emissions budget for the purposes of fulfilling the
requirements of the Federal Transportation Conformity rule.
DATES: This action will be effective June 24, 1996 unless by May 28,
1996 adverse or critical comments are received.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are
available for public inspection during normal business hours at the:
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch,
726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa V. Haugen at (913) 551-7877.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Based on ambient air quality data for the period 1989 through 1991,
the
[[Page 18252]]
Kansas and Missouri portions of the Kansas City ozone nonattainment
area were redesignated to attainment, and a maintenance plan was
approved, in a June 23, 1992, Federal Register notice. In the approved
maintenance plan, each state committed to completing comprehensive
volatile organic compound (VOC) point source inventory updates at least
twice in each five-year period following the effective date of the
area's redesignation. Area and mobile source inventories are to be
updated at least once every five years. These periodic updates are part
of each state's continued efforts to ascertain whether actual VOC
emissions are within the attainment inventory.
The 1992 approved maintenance SIP was submitted before EPA
finalized its maintenance plan guidance which provided that nitrogen
oxide (NOX) emissions inventories be included in maintenance
demonstrations. However, during the course of EPA review of the
submittal, EPA made an assessment of NOX emissions in Kansas City.
These emission inventory updates supersede the NOX inventory
information for the period 1990 through 2000 developed by EPA during
the review and approval of the 1992 maintenance plan.
On November 23, 1993, pursuant to section 176(c) of the Clean Air
Act, the EPA promulgated the final rule (hereafter referred to as the
Transportation Conformity rule), which established the process by which
the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Transit Administration,
and metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) determine conformity of
highway and transit projects. This rule applies to Kansas City as an
ozone maintenance area.
The emissions budget is the mechanism EPA has identified for
demonstrating consistency between emissions expected from
implementation of transportation plans, Transportation Improvement
Programs (TIP), and projects with estimates of emissions in the SIP
from on-road motor vehicles. Motor vehicle emissions budgets are the
explicit or implicit identification of the on-road motor vehicle-
related portion of the projected emission inventory used to demonstrate
maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone for
a particular year specified in the SIP. The motor vehicle emissions
budget establishes a cap on the predicted highway and transit vehicle
VOC and NOX emissions which, if exceeded, will result in a
nonconformity finding.
The maintenance plan for the Kansas City area was approved before
the promulgation of the Transportation Conformity rule, and therefore
did not include explicit motor vehicle emission budgets for VOCs and
NOX. These SIP revisions amend the 1992 Kansas City ozone
maintenance SIP to specify motor vehicle VOC and NOx emissions
budgets for the Kansas City air quality maintenance area.
II. Review of State Submittal
A comprehensive emissions inventory for both VOCs and NOX ,
which includes an explicit motor vehicle emissions budget, was
submitted by the state of Kansas on May 11, 1995, and by the state of
Missouri on April 12, 1995. These emissions inventory updates were
completed for the Kansas City ozone maintenance area, which includes
Wyandotte and Johnson counties in Kansas and Clay, Jackson, and Platte
counties in Missouri. With the exception of point sources and the
asphalt paving source category, all other emissions estimates were
calculated with 1990 as the base year, and projections were made from
the base to 2010.
Air quality monitoring data, which have recently been quality-
assured, indicate that measured exceedances of the ozone standard were
recorded on July 11, 12, and 13, 1995, at the Liberty monitoring site
in Kansas City. The highest recorded value for each day was .128 ppm,
.161 ppm, and .131 ppm, respectively. These exceedances, added to a
measured exceedance of the ozone standard of .128 ppm, recorded on July
29, 1993, puts the area in violation of the standard.
As required in the approved maintenance plan, contingency measures
must be implemented to address the violation of the ozone standard. The
approved maintenance plan also includes a commitment by the states to
complete a comprehensive VOC emission inventory should a violation of
the ozone standard occur. EPA has determined that the emission
inventory updates submitted by the states of Kansas and Missouri
fulfill the aforementioned commitment. However, if the Kansas City area
experiences further violations of the ozone standard, the emission
inventory will need to be revised.
A. VOC and NOX Emissions Inventory Updates
Part 3.2 and Appendices A, B, and C of the 1992 maintenance SIP
contain VOC emissions inventory estimates from point, area, and mobile
sources for the period 1988 through 2000. These SIP revisions update
and supersede the VOC emissions inventory in its entirety for the
period between 1990 and 2000. This revision also supplements Part 3.2
with VOC emissions inventory projections for 2005 and 2010 in order to
address the requirements of the Transportation Conformity rule. The
NOX emissions inventories supplement the 1992 maintenance SIP with
detailed NOX emissions estimates for the period 1990 through 2000
and for the years 2005 and 2010.
The new emission inventory numbers reflect significant changes in
emissions estimation methodology and changes in the data upon which
estimates are based. The reader is referred to the Technical Support
Document and the states' submittals for detailed information about
methodologies, emission factors, sources of input data, the basis for
projections, seasonal adjustments, conversions, and assumptions. The
1990 VOC inventory includes reductions attributable to Reid Vapor
Pressure control from 9.5 to 9.0 psi consistent with the 1992
Maintenance SIP.
Part 3.4 of the 1992 maintenance SIP specifically defined an
``action line'' that represented the maximum allowable VOC emissions in
the Kansas City metropolitan air quality planning area. The revised
1990 VOC emissions inventories replace the ``action line'' as the
number that represents the maximum allowable VOC emissions in the
Kansas City air quality planning area.
The VOC emissions inventories for the Kansas City ozone maintenance
area are presented in the following tables:
VOC Emissions Summary--All Counties
[Unless otherwise specified, the units of measurement are in kilograms per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-road Off-road Point
mobile mobile Biogenic Area source source Total
emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990.............................. 128282.53 39575.47 35821.05 86593.21 32284.52 322556.77
[[Page 18253]]
1992.............................. 96710.10 39857.92 35821.05 86156.15 27733.27 286278.50
1995.............................. 87355.63 41221.27 35821.05 89484.05 30007.33 283889.33
2000.............................. 81815.02 43085.96 35821.05 94974.59 32346.91 288043.53
2005.............................. 73897.25 45135.34 35821.05 100297.17 34977.68 290128.48
2010.............................. 77151.71 47053.42 35821.05 105007.73 37529.13 302563.04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions Summary--Missouri Counties (Jackson, Clay, Platte Counties)
[Unless otherwise specified, the units of measurement are in kilograms per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-road Off-road Point
mobile mobile Biogenic Area source source Total
emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990.............................. 81506.45 26222.22 22926.35 51480.28 21283.17 203418.47
1992.............................. 61373.89 26399.32 22926.35 51044.25 18621.05 180364.86
1995.............................. 55461.41 27237.63 22926.35 52808.29 20138.78 178572.46
2000.............................. 50495.69 28368.05 22926.35 55569.59 21708.13 179067.80
2005.............................. 45604.20 29684.52 22926.35 58481.09 23474.30 180170.47
2010.............................. 46641.63 30917.71 22926.35 60941.80 25162.72 186590.21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions Summary--Kansas Counties (Wyandotte and Johnson)
[Unless otherwise specified, the units of measurement are in kilograms per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-road Off-road Point
mobile mobile Biogenic Area source source Total
emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990.............................. 46776.08 13353.25 12894.70 35112.93 11001.34 119138.30
1992.............................. 35336.21 13458.59 12894.70 35111.91 9112.22 105913.64
1995.............................. 31894.22 13983.65 12894.70 36675.76 9868.55 105316.87
2000.............................. 31319.33 14717.91 12894.70 39405.01 10638.78 108975.73
2005.............................. 28293.04 15450.81 12894.70 41816.08 11503.38 109958.01
2010.............................. 30510.08 16135.71 12894.70 44065.93 12366.41 115972.83
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NOX emissions inventories for the Kansas City ozone
maintenance area are presented in the following tables:
NOX Emissions Summary--All Counties
[Unless otherwise specified, the units of measurement are in kilograms per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-road Off-road Point
mobile mobile Biogenic Area source source Total
emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990.............................. 103895.82 43860.30 0.00 15830.39 161550.89 325137.39
1992.............................. 102580.57 43182.37 0.00 15669.14 173748.93 335181.02
1995.............................. 101275.32 45812.23 0.00 16966.07 152629.66 316683.27
2000.............................. 98337.95 44300.25 0.00 18565.52 104439.12 265642.84
2005.............................. 95408.56 41857.70 0.00 20378.20 105334.55 262979.01
2010.............................. 98570.22 40375.29 0.00 21707.60 106156.52 266809.64
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX Emissions Summary--Missouri Counties (Jackson, Clay, Platte Counties)
[Unless otherwise specified, the units of measurement are in kilograms per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-road Off-road Point
mobile mobile Biogenic Area source source Total
emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990.............................. 66147.65 22398.17 0.00 4104.73 103125.99 195776.54
1992.............................. 65329.61 21998.33 0.00 4115.09 111842.06 203285.09
1995.............................. 64459.65 23655.85 0.00 4412.00 99474.58 192002.08
2000.............................. 60876.51 22757.27 0.00 4808.15 76461.04 164902.96
2005.............................. 59067.93 21277.86 0.00 5254.93 76772.77 162373.50
2010.............................. 60275.27 20396.86 0.00 5576.43 77030.49 163279.04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 18254]]
NOX Emissions Summary--Kansas Counties (Wyandotte and Johnson)
[Unless otherwise specified, the units of measurement are in kilograms per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-road Off-road Point
mobile mobile Biogenic Area source source Total
emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990.............................. 37748.17 21462.13 0.00 11725.66 58424.89 129360.85
1992.............................. 37250.96 21184.05 0.00 11554.05 61906.87 131895.93
1995.............................. 36815.67 22156.38 0.00 12554.07 53155.08 124681.20
2000.............................. 37461.44 21542.98 0.00 13757.38 27978.08 100739.88
2005.............................. 36340.63 20579.84 0.00 15123.27 28561.78 100605.51
2010.............................. 38294.96 19978.43 0.00 16131.17 29126.03 103530.60
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
These emission inventory updates define a VOC motor vehicle
emissions budget and an NOX motor vehicle emissions budget. The
emissions inventories in the Kansas and Missouri maintenance SIPs are
combined to establish these budgets to be used in determining
conformity of regional transportation plans and TIPs. Combined budgets
are preferable for determining conformity in bistate air quality
regions with a single MPO when emissions inventories are projected to
remain consistent with maintenance of the ozone standard.
Estimates of total VOC and NOX emissions in future years in
the maintenance area are less than required to demonstrate maintenance
of the ozone standard. In these circumstances, the Transportation
Conformity rule permits the SIP to explicitly quantify the difference
as a margin and include a portion of the margin in the motor vehicle
emissions budget. These SIP revisions explicitly quantify the margin
and explicitly assign a portion of the margin to the motor vehicle VOC
and NOX emissions budgets for conformity purposes.
Section 51.404 of the Transportation Conformity rule requires that
regional transportation plans establish ``horizon years'' which
envision a transportation system for certain future years, not more
than 10 years apart. These SIP revisions define the horizon years for
the Kansas City maintenance area to be 2000 and 2010. The motor vehicle
VOC and NOX emissions budgets for these years are above the motor
vehicle emissions inventory estimates for 2000 and 2010. This approach
is designed to protect emissions growth throughout the entire
maintenance period to the year 2010. The reader is referred to the
states' submissions for the calculations used to determine the motor
vehicle emissions budgets.
The regional motor vehicle VOC and NOX emissions budgets,
based on combining the inventories for the Missouri and Kansas portions
of the air quality maintenance area, are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regional motor Regional motor
Ozone precursor vehicle budget for vehicle budget for
the year 2000 the year 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Methane Hydrocarbons........ 87548 kg/summer 82885 kg/summer
day. day.
Nitrogen Oxides................. 119889 kg/summer 120121 kg/summer
day. day.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The motor vehicle emissions budgets were the subject of the
interagency consultation process as required by Sec. 51.402 of the
Transportation Conformity rule. The draft emissions inventories and
motor vehicle emissions budgets were reviewed by a regional air quality
policy advisory committee formed under the provisions of Sec. 174 of
the Clean Air Act and the regional transportation policy committee,
constituted in accordance with the Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act. They were published and made available for regional
public review and comment.
The Missouri portion of the emissions inventory update and motor
vehicle emissions budget was adopted by the Missouri Air Conservation
Commission, after proper notice and public hearing, on March 30, 1995.
A public hearing for the Kansas portion of the emissions inventory
update and motor vehicle emissions budget was held on May 8, 1995, and
adopted by the Secretary of Health and Environment on May 11, 1995.
Missouri and Kansas have submitted complete inventories containing
point, area, biogenic, on-road, and nonroad mobile source data and
accompanying documentation. The submittals provide adequate
documentation on the emission estimation procedures and the data
sources used to develop the inventory. The point and area source
inventories are complete. Emissions for each source category were
prepared or calculated according to the most current EPA guidance. The
VMT development methods are adequately described and documented, and
the most current EPA MOBILE model was correctly used to produce
emission factors for each of the vehicle classes. Therefore, the
submitted emission inventory updates meet current EPA guidance for the
development of an approvable emissions inventory. EPA ACTION: By this
action EPA grants full approval of the May 11, 1995, Kansas submittal
and the April 12, 1995, submittal from the state of Missouri. These SIP
revisions meet all of the requirements for an approvable emissions
inventory update.
The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates
no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in the Federal
Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision
should adverse or critical comments be filed.
If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn
before the effective date by publishing a subsequent notice that will
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a
proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on
this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should
do so at this time.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and
environmental factors, and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et. seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. Secs. 603 and
604). Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities
[[Page 18255]]
include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and
government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the CAA
do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements
that the state is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP
approval does not impose any new requirements, EPA certifies that it
does not have a significant impact on any small entities affected.
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-state relationship under the
CAA, preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds
(Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2)).
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a
July 10, 1995, memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
Under sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22,
1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed
or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to
state, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
Through submission of this SIP, the state has elected to adopt the
program provided for under section 110 of the CAA. These rules may bind
state and local governments to perform certain actions and also require
the private sector to perform certain duties. To the extent that the
rules being finalized for approval by this action will impose new
requirements, sources are already subject to these regulations under
state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to state or local
governments, or to the private sector, result from this final action.
EPA has also determined that this final action does not include a
mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to
state or local governments in the aggregate or to the private sector.
EPA has determined that these rules result in no additional costs to
tribal government.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 24, 1996. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review, nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: February 9, 1996.
Dennis Grams,
Regional Administrator.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart R--Kansas
2. Section 52.870 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(31) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.870 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(31) On May 11, 1995, the Kansas Department of Health and
Environment submitted an emissions inventory update to the Kansas City
maintenance plan approved by EPA on June 23, 1992. The submittal also
establishes a motor vehicle emissions budget for the purpose of
fulfilling the requirements of the Federal Transportation Conformity
rule.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Kansas City Ozone Maintenance State Implementation Plan
Revision: Emissions Inventories and Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for
the Kansas City Metropolitan Area, adopted on May 11, 1995.
Subpart AA--Missouri
3. Section 52.1320 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(94) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1320 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(94) On April 12, 1995, the Missouri Department of Natural
Resources submitted an emissions inventory update to the Kansas City
maintenance plan approved by EPA on June 23, 1992. The submittal also
establishes a motor vehicle emissions budget for the purpose of
fulfilling the requirements of the Federal Transportation Conformity
rule.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Kansas City Ozone Maintenance SIP Revisions: Emission
Inventories and Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets, adopted by the
Missouri Air Conservation Commission on March 30, 1995.
[FR Doc. 96-10132 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10131 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Ohio
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18255-18257]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10131]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[OH21-2-7260; FRL-5450-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Ohio
AGENCY: United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to letter notice procedures described at 54 FR 2214
(January 19, 1989), USEPA approved minor revisions to the Ohio State
Implementation Plan (SIP) on October 31, 1995. This document describes
the approved revisions and incorporates the relevant material into the
Code of Federal Regulations. The SIP revisions are site-specific rules
that are required as part of an effort to achieve the National Ambient
Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. The rules will benefit the
environment and people who have asthma and other respiratory diseases
by reducing volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions, a precursor to
smog formation.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date is April 25, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the State SIP revision request and USEPA's letter
notice of approval are available for public inspection during normal
business hours at the following locations:
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and
Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard (AR-18J), Chicago,
Illinois 60604; and
Office of Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Air Docket
6102), United States Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW,
Washington, DC, 20460.
[[Page 18256]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fayette Bright, Regulation Development
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6069.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA) originally submitted a SIP revision request on June 7, 1993,
which established VOC reasonably available control technology (RACT)
requirements for the facilities not covered by a control technique
guideline (CTG). VOC RACT requirements were established for the
following non-CTG sources 1:
\1\ The USEPA issued three sets of control technique guidelines
documents which established a ``presumptive norm'' for RACT for
various categories of VOC sources. Sources not covered by a CTG were
called non-CTG sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AK Steel Corporation (Armco Steel Company)
B.F. Goodrich Company--Akron Chemical Plant
Chevron U.S.A. Incorporated
Cincinnati Specialties Incorporated
Day-Glo Color Corporation
Firestone Synthetic Rubber and Latex Company
Formica Corporation
Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company--Akron Polymer
Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company--Plant C
International Paper Company
Lubrizol Corporation
Midwest Mica and Insulation Company
Morton International Incorporated
PPG Industries Incorporated
Reilly Industries Incorporated
Ritrama Duramark
Sprayon Products Incorporated
Steelcraft Manufacturing Company
Zeneca (ICI Americas, Perry)
USEPA considered the State's request a minor SIP revision request.
In response to USEPA comments on the request, the State submitted
revisions to the original submittal on February 17, 1995, and August
22, 1995. The first revision submitted by the State included revised
rules and permit requirements (implemented through Findings and Orders
issued to the facilities) for a number of the facilities which
established site-specific non-CTG VOC RACT regulations. The first
revision did not, however, establish requirements for all of the non-
CTG facilities and some of the revised rules contained deficiencies.
Therefore, the State submmitted a second revision on August 22, 1995,
correcting these deficiencies and establishing requirements for the
remaining non-CTG facilities.
On October 31, 1995, USEPA approved the SIP revision requests under
Section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) by notifying the affected
facilities and the OEPA by letter that USEPA was approving the SIP
revisions.2 The SIP revisions became final and effective on that
date. USEPA has determined that these SIP revisions satisfy
requirements for RACT for the non-CTG facilities and comply with all
other applicable requirements of the CAA and USEPA policy and
regulations concerning such revisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Notice of the proposed approval of these SIP revisions was
published in the Federal Register on July 10, 1995. Due to the minor
nature of these revisions, USEPA concluded that conducting the usual
notice-and-comment rulemaking prior to approving the revisions would
have been ``unnecessary and contrary to public interest,'' and
therefore was not required by the Administrative Procedure Act, 5
U.S.C. Section 553(b). USEPA therefore sent notice of the approval
by letter to the affected facilities and the OEPA in accordance with
the procedure described in a January 30, 1989, memorandum from
USEPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards to the Regional
Air Division Directors entitled ``Procedures for Letter Notice
Approval of Minor SIP Actions.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The October 31, 1995, letter notice approvals, in conjunction with
rule approvals published in the Federal Register on March 23, 1995 (60
FR 15235), correct all VOC RACT deficiencies cited in the action
published May 9, 1994 (59 FR 23796). In the May 9, 1994, rulemaking
action and the September 23, 1993, proposed rulemaking action (58 FR
49458), the rule deficiencies are described. The March 23, 1995,
rulemaking describes how the deficiencies are remedied. The
deficiencies for Canton, Youngstown, Toledo, and Dayton and some of the
deficiencies for Cleveland and Cincinnati were found to be remedied
when USEPA took final rulemaking action approving revisions to VOC RACT
regulations for those areas. (See 60 FR 15235, March 23, 1995).
Clocks imposing sanctions on Canton, Youngstown, Toledo, Dayton,
Cleveland, and Cincinnati were started as a result of the May 9, 1994,
rulemaking action on VOC RACT described above. In order to stop the
clocks, Ohio had to correct the VOC RACT deficiencies and have them
approved into the SIP by USEPA November 9, 1995. The rule approvals
published March 23, 1995, stopped the sanctions clocks for Canton,
Youngstown, Toledo, and Dayton. The same March 23, 1995, rule approval
corrected a number of the rule deficiencies for the Cleveland and
Cincinnati areas. The remaining deficiencies were corrected by the
October 31, 1995, letter notices and stopped the VOC RACT sanctions
clocks for those areas.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any
SIP. USEPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP in light
of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a
July 10, 1995, memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., USEPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.)
Alternatively, USEPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the Act
do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements
that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the federal SIP
approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it does
not have a significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover,
due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the Act,
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute
federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
Act forbids USEPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.
Union Electric Co. v. USEPA, 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995, signed into law on March 22, 1995, USEPA must undertake
various actions in association with proposed or final rules that
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to the private sector, or to State, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate.
Through submission of the state implementation plan or plan
revisions approved in this action, the State has elected to adopt the
program provided for under section 110 of the Clean Air Act. The rules
and commitments being approved in this action may bind State,
[[Page 18257]]
local and tribal governments to perform certain actions and also may
ultimately lead to the private sector being required to perform certain
duties. To the extent that the rules and commitments being approved by
this action will impose or lead to the imposition of any mandate upon
the State, local or tribal governments either as the owner or operator
of a source or as a regulator, or would impose or lead to the
imposition of any mandate upon the private sector, EPA's action will
impose no new requirements; such sources are already subject to these
requirements under State law. Accordingly, no additional costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result
from this action. The USEPA has also determined that this action does
not include a mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate
or to the private sector.
Under Section 307(b)(1) of the Act, as amended, judicial review of
this action is available only by filing a petition for review in the
United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 24,
1996. The action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce
their requirements. See section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: February 29, 1996.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40, of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended to read as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart KK--Ohio
2. Section 52.1870 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(102) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1870 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(102) On June 7, 1993, and February 17, 1995, the Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) submitted revisions to the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone. The revisions include 19 new non-
Control Technique Guideline volatile organic compound (VOC) rules,
Findings and Orders for 5 companies, and two permits to install.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) OEPA OAC Rule 3745-21-01, Definitions, Paragraphs (Q); (T);
effective January 17, 1995.
(B) OEPA OAC Rule 3745-21-04, Attainment Dates and Compliance Time
Schedules, Paragraphs (C)(40); (C)(41); (C)(46); (C)(48); (C)(49);
(C)(50); (C)(51); (C)(53); (C)(54); (C)(59); (C)(60); (C)(61); (C)(62);
effective January 17, 1995.
(C) OEPA OAC Rule 3745-21-09, Control of Emissions of Volatile
Organic Compounds from Stationary Sources, Paragraphs (FF), (GG), (HH),
(II), (JJ), (KK), (LL), (MM), (NN), (OO), (PP), (QQ), (SS), (TT), (YY),
(ZZ), (AAA); (BBB); effective January 17, 1995.
(D) Director's Final Findings and Orders for AK Steel Corporation
(Middletown), International Paper Company (Cincinnati), Midwest Mica &
Insulation Company (Cleveland), Reilly Industries, Inc. (Cleveland),
and Sprayon Products, Inc. (Bedford Heights), Issued by Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency on August 18, 1995.
(E) Permit to Install, Application Number 13-2396, for Excello
Specialty Company, APS Premise Number 1318607686. The date of issuance
is December 11, 1991.
(F) Permit to Install, Application Number 14-2096, for Hilton Davis
Company, APS Premise Number 1431070039. The date of issuance is June
12, 1991.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-10131 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10129 Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plan; Wisconsin; Industrial Adhesives SIP Revision
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18257-18259]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10129]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[WI68-01-7294a; FRL-5461-7]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plan;
Wisconsin; Industrial Adhesives SIP Revision
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA approves a revision to the Wisconsin State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone that was submitted on December 12,
1995, and later supplemented on January 12, 1996. This revision
requires the control of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from
facilities that utilize industrial adhesives. This submittal was made
to satisfy the requirement of the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) that all
major VOC sources in moderate, or worse, ozone nonattainment areas have
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) applied to them. This
regulation will also be used to generate reductions in VOC emissions,
which the State will use to fulfill the CAA requirement to reduce VOC
emissions by at least 15 percent from the 1990 baseline emissions. In
the proposed rules section of this Federal Register, the EPA is
proposing approval of, and soliciting comments on, this requested SIP
revision. If adverse comments are received on this action, the EPA will
withdraw this final rule and address the comments received in response
to this action in a final rule on the related proposed rule, which is
being published in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register.
A second public comment period will not be held. Parties interested in
commenting on this action should do so at this time. This approval
makes federally enforceable the State's rule that has been incorporated
by reference.
DATES: The ``direct final'' is effective on June 24, 1996, unless EPA
receives adverse or critical comments by May 28, 1996. If the effective
date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Carlton T. Nash, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. EPA,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Copies of the proposed SIP revision and EPA's analysis are
available for inspection at the U.S. EPA, Region 5, Air and Radiation
Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. (Please
telephone Douglas Aburano at (312) 353-6960 before visiting the Region
5 Office.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Aburano, Environmental
Engineer, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. EPA , Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-6960.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 182(b) of the CAA sets forth the requirements for ozone
nonattainment areas which have been classified as moderate or above.
Section 182(b)(1)(A) requires those States with ozone nonattainment
areas classified as moderate or above to submit plans to reduce VOC
emissions by at least 15 percent from the 1990 baseline emissions. The
1990 baseline, as described by EPA's emission inventory guidance, is
the amount of anthropogenic VOC emissions emitted on a typical summer
day.
[[Page 18258]]
Section 182(b)(2) of the CAA requires States to adopt RACT rules
for all areas designated nonattainment for ozone and classified as
moderate or above for both sources covered by Control Technology
Guidance (CTG) documents issued by EPA and all major sources not
covered by a CTG document. The EPA has not issued a CTG document for
this source category.
To fulfill the RACT requirement, and as a part of its 15 percent
plan, the State of Wisconsin has developed and adopted a rule to reduce
the VOC emissions from the use of industrial adhesives operations in
those areas of the State that are classified as moderate or higher.
These areas are the counties of Kenosha, Kewaunee, Manitowoc,
Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Sheboygan, Washington, and Waukesha.
II. Evaluation of State Submittal
On November 15, 1993, the State of Wisconsin submitted its proposed
15 percent plan. The 15 percent plan submittal was followed by several
submittals that contain regulations that will achieve the reductions
required by the 15 percent plan. On December 12, 1995, Wisconsin
submitted its industrial adhesives rule, which was later supplemented
on January 12, 1996, as part of its 15 percent plan. The industrial
adhesives portion of the 15 percent plan was found complete in a letter
to Don Theiler, Director of the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources' (WDNR) Bureau of Air Management, dated February 7, 1996. The
WDNR followed the required legal procedures for adopting this rule that
are the prerequisites for EPA to consider in approving this rule as
part of Wisconsin's federally enforceable SIP. The WDNR held two public
hearings for this rule on February 1, 1995 and submitted this rule to
the EPA as a SIP revision under signature of the Governor's designee.
In developing the control requirements for this source category,
WDNR developed the rule with input from affected facilities, adhesive
suppliers, small business organizations and other state agencies.
Wisconsin's rule, NR 422.127, reduces the VOC emissions from the
affected sources by limiting the VOC content of the adhesives used or
by requiring a minimum solids contents in the adhesives used.
In addition to recordkeeping requirements that apply generally to
VOC sources, facilities that are affected by the coating limits found
in this rule must keep records of the following:
1. A unique name of identification number for each adhesive and
adhesive primer used.
2. The VOC content of each adhesive and adhesive primer, as
applied, in units of kilograms per liter (pounds per gallon), excluding
water.
3. The percent solids by weight in each adhesive or adhesive
primer, as applied.
Other facilities that are not affected by the limits of this rule
due to low-use exemptions must keep records indicating that the
exemption threshold is not breached. If a facility goes above the
exemption threshold, it must comply with the limits of this rule.
A more detailed analysis of the State's submittal is contained in a
technical support document, which is available at the Regional Office
listed above. In determining the approvability of this VOC rule, EPA
evaluated the rule for consistency with Federal requirements, including
section 110 and part D of the Clean Air Act.
III. Final Rulemaking Action
The EPA approves Wisconsin's industrial adhesives rule as being
RACT for this source category thereby making this rule federally
enforceable.
Because EPA considers this action noncontroversial and routine, we
are approving it without prior proposal. This action will become
effective on June 24, 1996. However, if we receive adverse comments by
May 28, 1996, EPA will publish a document that withdraws this action.
IV. Miscellaneous
A. Applicability to Future SIP Decisions
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any
SIP. The EPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP in
light of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
B. Executive Order 12866
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214), as revised by a July
10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air
and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this
regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
C. Regulatory Flexibility
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604).
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not for-profit enterprises,
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
This approval does not create any new requirements. Therefore, I
certify that this action does not have a significant impact on any
small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-
State relationship under the Act, preparation of the regulatory
flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic
reasonableness of the State action. The Act forbids EPA to base its
actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S.
EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (1976).
D. Unfunded Mandates
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, the EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires the EPA to establish a
plan for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
The EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated today
does not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs
of $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments
in the aggregate, or to the private sector.
This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under State
or local law, and imposes no new Federal requirements. Accordingly, no
additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or the private
sector, result from this action.
E. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under Section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review
of this
[[Page 18259]]
action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by June 24, 1996. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review, nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements (See Section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: April 5, 1996.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, title
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart YY--Wisconsin
2. Section 52.2570 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(93) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.2570 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(93) A revision to the ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) was
submitted by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources on December
11, 1995 and later supplemented on January 12, 1996. This revision
consists of a volatile organic compound regulation that establishes
reasonably available control technology for facilities that use
industrial adhesives.
(i) Incorporation by reference. The following sections of the
Wisconsin Administrative Code are incorporated by reference.
(A) NR 422.02(1e), (1m) and (28j) as created and published in the
(Wisconsin) Register, August, 1995, No. 476, effective September 1,
1995.
(B) NR 422.127 as created and published in the (Wisconsin)
Register, August, 1995, No. 476, effective September 1, 1995.
(C) NR 422.132(1)(c) as repealed, recreated and published in the
(Wisconsin) Register, August, 1995, No. 476, effective September 1,
1995.
[FR Doc. 96-10129 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10127 Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, Florida: Approval of Revisions to the Florida SIP
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18259-18260]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10127]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[FL-64-2-9611a; FRL-5444-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, Florida:
Approval of Revisions to the Florida SIP
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to the Florida State Implementation
Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Florida through the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) on April 24, 1995. This
submittal includes amendments to the federally enforceable state
operating permit program and the SIP regulations for perchloroethylene
dry cleaning facilities.
DATES: This final rule will be effective June 24, 1996 unless adverse
or critical comments are received by May 28, 1996. If the effective
date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Joey
LeVasseur, at the EPA Regional Office listed below. Copies of the
documents relative to this action are available for public inspection
during normal business hours at the following locations.
Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Air Docket 6102), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC
20460.
EPA, Region 4 Air Programs Branch, 345 Courtland Street NE., Atlanta,
Georgia 30365.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Twin Towers Office
Building, 2600 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Interested persons wanting to examine
documents relative to this action should make an appointment with the
Region 4 Air Programs Branch at least 24 hours before the visiting day.
To schedule the appointment or to request additional information,
contact Joey LeVasseur, Regulatory Planning and Development Section,
Air Programs Branch, Air, Pesticides & Toxics Management Division,
Region 4 EPA, 345 Courtland Street, NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30365. The
telephone number is 404/347-3555 ext. 4215. Reference file FL64-2-
9611a.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is approving revisions to the Florida
SIP submitted by the State of Florida through the FDEP on April 24,
1995. These revisions amend the federally enforceable state operating
permit program and the SIP regulations for perchloroethylene dry
cleaning facilities. The following is a description of the revisions.
The regulations are more fully discussed in the official SIP submittal
that is available at the Region IV office listed under the ADDRESSES
section of this notice.
62-210.200 and 62.296.200
These sections were updated to include ``emission control
equipment'' within the definition of ``dry cleaning facility,'' for
consistency with the definitions and requirements of the Title V
program.
62-210.300(2)(b)
This section previously was unclear and was revised to clarify the
requirements for federally enforceable state operating permits
(FESOPs).
62-210.300(4)
This section was revised to provide a temporary exemption to area
source dry cleaning facilities from the State's minor source
preconstruction review requirements.
62-296.412
This section was revised to update the applicable requirements for
perchloroethylene dry cleaning facilities. The amendments make it clear
that perchloroethylene facilities which have not yet been permitted
under Title V continue to be subject to the requirements of this
section in the interim.
Final Action
In this action, EPA is approving the revision to the SIP submitted
by the State of Florida through the FDEP on April 24, 1995. The EPA is
publishing this rule making without a prior proposal for approval
because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and
anticipates no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in
this Federal Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the
SIP revision should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action
will be effective June 24, 1996 unless, within 30 days of its
publication, adverse or critical comments are received.
If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn
before the
[[Page 18260]]
effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will withdraw
the final action. All public comments received will then be addressed
in a subsequent final rule based on the separate proposed rule. The EPA
will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. If
no such comments are received, the public is advised that this action
will be effective June 24, 1996.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C.
7607(b)(1), petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed
in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by
June 24, 1996. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this
rule for purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within
which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7607(b)(2).)
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
Nothing in this action shall be construed as permitting or allowing
or establishing a precedent for any future request for a revision to
any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to the state
implementation plan shall be considered separately in light of specific
technical, economic, and environmental factors and in relation to
relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the CAA
do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements
that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP-
approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it does
not have a significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover,
due to the nature of the Federal-state relationship under the CAA,
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.
Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976);
42 U.S.C. section 7410(a)(2) and 7410(k)(3).
Unfunded Mandates
Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22,
1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed
or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to
State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
Through submission of this state implementation plan or plan
revision, the State and any affected local or tribal governments have
elected to adopt the program provided for under Section 110 of the CAA.
These rules may bind State, local and tribal governments to perform
certain actions and also require the private sector to perform certain
duties. EPA has examined whether the rules being approved by this
action will impose no new requirements, since such sources are already
subject to these regulations under State law. Accordingly, no
additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the
private sector, result from this action, and therefore there will be no
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: January 29, 1996.
Phyllis P. Harris,
Acting Regional Administrator.
Part 52 of chapter I, title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart K--Florida
2. Section 52.520, is amended by adding paragraph (c)(94) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.520 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(94) Revisions to the Florida SIP regarding perchloroethylene dry
cleaning facilities submitted on April 24, 1995.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
Sections 62-210.200(17) and (48)(c); 62-210.300(2)(b) and (4); 62-
296.200(58); and 62-296.412 of the F.A.C., effective April 18, 1995.
(ii) Other material. None.
[FR Doc. 96-10127 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10121 Incentive Grant Criteria for Alcohol Traffic Safety Programs
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18247-18248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10121]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
23 CFR Part 1309
[NHTSA Docket No. 82-18; Notice 14]
RIN 2127-AG22
Incentive Grant Criteria for Alcohol Traffic Safety Programs
AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule removes Part 1309 from title 23 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR). Part 1309 established criteria for awarding
incentive grants to States that implemented effective programs to
reduce drunk driving and driving under the influence of a controlled
substance, in accordance with section 408 of title 23, United States
Code. The regulation is being removed because it is unnecessary and
obsolete. Funds for the section 408 program have not been authorized
since FY 1994.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 28, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Marlene Markison, Office of State
and Community Services, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202) 366-2121; or
Ms. Heidi L. Coleman, Office of Chief Counsel, Room 5219, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202) 366-1834.
[[Page 18248]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 4, 1995, President Clinton directed
all Federal Departments and agencies to take four steps to overhaul the
nation's regulatory system. The first step was to conduct a page-by-
page review of all agency regulations now in force and eliminate or
revise those that are outdated or otherwise in need of reform. The
review was to include careful consideration of a number of issues,
including whether the regulation is obsolete, whether its intended goal
can be achieved in more efficient less intrusive ways, or whether
States or local governments can do the job (making Federal regulation
unnecessary).
NHTSA conducted a thorough, page-by-page review of all agency
regulations, including those that pertain to State and community
highway safety programs.
As a result of these efforts, NHTSA has determined that Part 1309
should be removed from title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), because it is unnecessary and obsolete.
Part 1309 established criteria for awarding incentive grants to
States that implemented effective programs to reduce drunk driving and
driving under the influence of a controlled substance, in accordance
with 23 U.S.C. 408. Part 1309 was first published in the Federal
Register, as 23 CFR Part 1209, on February 7, 1983 (48 FR 5545). It was
amended and redesignated as 23 CFR Part 1309 on June 19, 1986 (51 FR
22276). It was further amended on July 22, 1987 (52 FR 27614), May 18,
1988 (53 FR 17692) and August 25, 1988 (53 FR 32375).
Funds for the section 408 program have not been authorized since FY
1994. Because the regulation implements a program which is no longer
active, and currently appears in the CFR among regulations that
implement programs that continue to be active, its removal will avoid
confusion for potential grant applicants. States that have remaining
section 408 balances must expend their funds in accordance with 23
U.S.C. 408, OMB Circular A-87, other applicable grant funding policies
(for current policies, States should consult the NHTSA/FHWA Highway
Safety Grant Management Manual) and the agreements the States entered
with NHTSA when they received their funds.
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
(a) Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures
NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under
E.O. 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies
and procedures. This rulemaking document was not reviewed under E.O.
12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review.'' This action has been
determined to be not ``significant'' under the Department of
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures.
(b) Regulatory Flexibility Act
In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354,
5 U.S.C. 601-612), the agency has evaluated the effects of this rule on
small entities. Based on the evaluation, the agency hereby certifies
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, the preparation of a
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is unnecessary.
(c) Executive Order 12612 (Federalism Assessment)
This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined
that this action does not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a federalism assessment.
(d) Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not contain a collection of information
requirement for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
(e) National Environmental Policy Act
The agency has analyzed this action for the purpose of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has
determined that this action would not have any effect on the quality of
the environment.
(f) Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)
This amendment to the regulation does not have any preemptive or
retroactive effect. It imposes no requirements on the States, but
rather simply removes from the regulation outdated and obsolete
provisions that no longer apply. The enabling legislation does not
establish a procedure for judicial review of final rules promulgated
under its provisions. There is no requirement that individuals submit a
petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before
they may file suit in court.
Notice and Comment
Because the amendments relate to a grant program and are therefore
not covered by the Administrative Procedure Act, and since they merely
contain technical changes that remove outdated and obsolete provisions
from the regulation and do not impose any additional requirements, the
amendments are being made without prior notice and opportunity to
comment.
List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 1309
Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse, Grant programs--transportation, Highway
safety.
Under the authority of 49 CFR Part 1.50, Title 23 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended by removing Part 1309.
Issued on: April 19, 1996.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-10121 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10102 Alabama; Final Authorization of Revisions to State Hazardous Waste Management Program
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18281-18284]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10102]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[FRL-5459-2]
Alabama; Final Authorization of Revisions to State Hazardous
Waste Management Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Immediate final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Alabama has applied for final authorization of revisions to
its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA). Alabama's revisions consist of Section B
``Corrective Action Beyond Facility Boundary'' and Section C
``Corrective Action for Injection Wells'' of the HSWA Codification Rule
in HSWA Cluster II, ``Burning of Hazardous Waste in Boilers and
Industrial Furnaces Corrections and Technical Amendment'', ``Burning of
Hazardous Waste in Boilers and Industrial Furnaces Technical Amendment
II'', and ``Boilers and Industrial Furnaces; Administrative Stay for
Coke Ovens'' which are provisions in RCRA Cluster II and ``Corrective
Action Management Units and Temporary Units'' (CAMU), a RCRA Cluster
III provision. These requirements are listed in Section B of this
notice. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed
Alabama's applications and has made a decision, subject to public
review and comment, that Alabama's hazardous waste program revisions
satisfy all of the requirements necessary to qualify for final
authorization. Thus, EPA intends to approve Alabama's hazardous waste
program revisions. Alabama's applications for program revisions are
available for public review and comment.
DATES: Final authorization for Alabama's program revisions shall be
effective June 24, 1996 unless EPA publishes a prior Federal Register
action withdrawing this immediate final rule. All comments on Alabama's
program revision applications must be received by the close of
business, May 28, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Copies of Alabama's program revision applications are
available during 8:00 am to 4:30 pm at the following addresses for
inspection and copying: Alabama Department of Environmental Management,
1751 Congressman W. L. Dickinson Drive, Montgomery, Alabama 36109-2608,
(334) 271-7700; U.S. EPA, Region 4, Library, 345 Courtland Street, NE,
Atlanta, Georgia 30365; (404) 347-4216. Written comments should be sent
to Al Hanke at the address listed below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Hanke, Chief, State Programs
Section, Waste Programs Branch, Waste Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 345 Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta,
Georgia 30365; (404) 347-2234 vmx 2018.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
States with final authorization under Section 3006(b) of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (``RCRA'' or ``the Act''), 42
U.S.C. 6926(b), have a continuing obligation to maintain a hazardous
waste program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less
stringent than the Federal hazardous waste program. In addition, as an
interim measure, the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984
(Public Law 98-616, November 8, 1984, hereinafter ``HSWA'') allows
States to revise their programs to become substantially equivalent
instead of equivalent to RCRA requirements promulgated under HSWA
authority. States exercising the latter option receive ``interim
authorization'' for the HSWA requirements under Section
[[Page 18282]]
3006(g) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6926(g), and later apply for final
authorization for the HSWA requirements. Revisions to State hazardous
waste programs are necessary when Federal or State statutory or
regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur.
Most commonly, State program revisions are necessitated by changes to
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR Parts 260-268 and 124 and 270.
B. Alabama
Alabama initially received final authorization for its base RCRA
program effective on December 22, 1987. Alabama received authorization
for revisions to its program on January 28, 1992, July 12, 1992,
December 21, 1992, May 17, 1993, November 23, 1993, April 4, 1994,
January 13, 1995 and October 13, 1995. On July 1, 1991, and June 25,
1993, Alabama submitted program revision applications for additional
program approvals. Today, Alabama is seeking approval of its program
revisions in accordance with 40 CFR 271.21(b)(3).
EPA has reviewed Alabama's applications and has made an immediate
final decision that Alabama's hazardous waste program revisions satisfy
all of the requirements necessary to qualify for final authorization.
Consequently, EPA intends to grant final authorization for the
additional program modifications to Alabama. The public may submit
written comments on EPA's immediate final decision up until May 28,
1996.
Copies of Alabama's applications for these program revisions are
available for inspection and copying at the locations indicated in the
``Addresses'' section of this notice. Approval of Alabama's program
revisions shall become effective June 24, 1996, unless an adverse
comment pertaining to the State's revisions discussed in this notice is
received by the end of the comment period.
If an adverse comment is received EPA will publish either (1) a
withdrawal of the immediate final decision or (2) a notice containing a
response to comments which either affirms that the immediate final
decision takes effect or reverses the decision.
EPA shall administer any RCRA hazardous waste permits, or portions
of permits that contain conditions based upon the Federal program
provisions for which the State is applying for authorization and which
were issued by EPA prior to the effective date of this authorization.
EPA will suspend issuance of any further permits under the provisions
for which the State is being authorized on the effective date of this
authorization.
Alabama is today seeking authority to administer the following
Federal requirements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FR
Federal requirement FR reference promulgation State authority
date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Checklist 44 B............................... 52 FR 45788.............. 12/1/87 335-14-5-.06(11)(e),(e)1
,2
335-14-5.06(12)(c)
HSWA Codification Rule; Corrective Action
Beyond Facility Boundary
Checklist 44 C............................... 52 FR 45788.............. 12/1/87 335-6-8-.07
335-14-6-.01(1)(c)
HSWA Codification Rule; Correction Action
for Injection Wells
Checklist 94................................. 56 FR 32688.............. 7/17/9 335.1401(3)(c)2.(ii)(II)
335-14-.01(6)(a)2,2.(ii)
335-14-6-.16(1)
335-14-7-.05(1)(c)(d)
335-14-7-.08 (1-
8),(9)(a)(c),(10)
335-14-7-Appendix I-IV,
Appendix VII-X
335-14-8-.02(13)(a)
2.(ii)(II)(III)
335-14-8-.02(13)(a)5.(vi
i)
335-14-8-.02(13)(a)6,(b)
1
335-14-8-.06(5)(b)1,4
335-14-8-.06(5)(c)2.(i),
2.(ii), 3.(vi),3.(vii)
335-14-8-.07(4)(f)(g)
Burning of Hazardous Waste in Boilers and
Industrial Furnaces; Corrections and
Technical Amendments I
Checklist 96................................. 56 FR 42504.............. 8/27/91 335-14-2-.01(2)(d)2,2.(i
-iii)
335-14-6-.07(3)(d)2,
(d)2.(i),(ii)
335-14-6-.07(4)(a)(b)
335.14.7-.08(1)(3)(4)(5)
, (9)(a)2(10-13)
335-14-7-Appendix
IX,XI,XII
Burning of Hazardous Waste in Boilers and
Industrial Furnaces; Technical
Amendments II
Checklist 98................................. 56 FR 43874.............. 9/5/91 335-14-7-.08(1)
[[Page 18283]]
Burning of Hazardous Waste in Boilers and
Industrial Furnaces; Administrative Stay
for Coke Ovens
Checklist 121................................ 58 FR 8658............... 2/16/93 335-14-1-.02(1)
335-14-5-.01(3)
335-14-5-.06(12)(b)
335-14-5-.19(1)(a),(1)(a
)1,2
335-14-5-19(1)(b)1,(1)(b
)1.(i),(ii)
335-14-5-.19(1)(b)2,(1)(
c), (1)(c)1-
(7),(1)d,(1)(e),
(1)(e)1,2,3,3.(i).3.(ii
),
(1)(e)4,(1)(f),(1)(g),(
1)(h)
335-14-5-.19(2)(a-g)
335-14-6-.01(1)(a)
335-14-9-.01(2)
335-14-1-.02(2)
335-14-8-.04(3)(b)
Corrective Action Management Units and
Temporary Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama's applications for these program revisions meet all of the
statutory and regulatory requirements established by RCRA. Accordingly,
Alabama is granted final authorization to operate its hazardous waste
program as revised.
Alabama now has responsibility for permitting treatment, storage,
and disposal facilities within its borders and carrying out other
aspects of the RCRA program, subject to the limitations of its program
revision applications and previously approved authorities. Alabama also
has primary enforcement responsibilities, although EPA retains the
right to conduct inspections under Section 3007 of RCRA and to take
enforcement actions under sections 3008, 3013, and 7003 of RCRA.
Compliance With Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from the
requirements of Section 6 of Executive Order 12866.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.L.
104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. When a written statement is needed for an EPA rule, section
205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, giving
them meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising them on compliance with the
regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. EPA does not anticipate that the approval of
Alabama's hazardous waste program referenced in today's notice will
result in annual costs of $100 million or more.
EPA's approval of state programs generally has a deregulatory
effect on the private sector because once it is determined that a state
hazardous waste program meets the requirements of RCRA section 3006(b)
and the regulations promulgated thereunder at 40 CFR Part 271, owners
and operators of hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal
facilities (TSDFs) may take advantage of the flexibility that an
approved state may exercise. Such flexibility will reduce, not increase
compliance costs for the private sector. Thus, today's rule is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The Agency recognizes that small governments may own and/
or operate TSDFs that will become subject to the requirements of an
approved state hazardous waste program. However, such small governments
which own and/or operate TSDFs are already subject to the requirements
in 40 CFR Parts 264, 265, and 270. Once EPA authorizes a state to
administer its own hazardous waste program and any revisions to that
program, these same small governments will be able to own and operate
their TSDFs with increased levels of flexibility provided under the
approved state program.
Certification Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 605(b), I hereby certify
that this authorization will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. This authorization effectively
suspends the applicability of certain Federal regulations in favor of
Alabama's program, thereby eliminating duplicative requirements for
handlers of hazardous waste in the State. It does not impose any new
burdens on small entities. This rule, therefore, does not require a
regulatory flexibility analysis.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
[[Page 18284]]
Confidential business information, Hazardous materials transportation,
Hazardous waste, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control,
Water supply.
Authority: This notice is issued under the authority of Sections
2002(a), 3006, and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as
amended (42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b)).
Dated: April 4, 1996.
John H. Hankinson, Jr.,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-10102 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10101 North Carolina; Final Authorization of Revisions to State Hazardous Waste Management Program
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18284-18286]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10101]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[FRL-5459-1]
North Carolina; Final Authorization of Revisions to State
Hazardous Waste Management Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Immediate final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: North Carolina has applied for final authorization of
revisions to its hazardous waste program under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). North Carolina's revisions
consist of the provisions contained in rules promulgated between July
1, 1993, and June 30, 1994, otherwise known as RCRA Cluster IV. These
requirements are listed in Section B of this notice. The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed North Carolina's application and
has made a decision, subject to public review and comment, that North
Carolina's hazardous waste program revisions satisfy all of the
requirements necessary to qualify for final authorization. Thus, EPA
intends to approve North Carolina's hazardous waste program revisions.
North Carolina's application for program revisions is available for
public review and comment.
DATES: Final authorization for North Carolina's program revisions shall
be effective June 24, 1996, unless EPA publishes a prior Federal
Register action withdrawing this immediate final rule. All comments on
North Carolina's program revision application must be received by the
close of business, May 28, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Copies of North Carolina's program revision application are
available during normal business hours at the following addresses for
inspection and copying: North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources, P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina
27611-7687; U.S. EPA Region 4, Library, 345 Courtland Street, NE,
Atlanta, Georgia 30365; (404) 347-4216. Written comments should be sent
to Al Hanke at the address listed below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Al Hanke, Chief, State Programs
Section, Waste Programs Branch, Waste Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 345 Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta,
Georgia 30365; (404) 347-2234.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
States with final authorization under Section 3006(b) of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (``RCRA'' or ``the Act''), 42
U.S.C. 6926(b), have a continuing obligation to maintain a hazardous
waste program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less
stringent than the Federal hazardous waste program.
In addition, as an interim measure, the Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-616, November 8, 1984, hereinafter
``HSWA'') allows States to revise their programs to become
substantially equivalent instead of equivalent to RCRA requirements
promulgated under HSWA authority. States exercising the latter option
receive ``interim authorization'' for the HSWA requirements under
Section 3006(g) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6926(g), and later apply for final
authorization for the HSWA requirements.
Revisions to State hazardous waste programs are necessary when
Federal or State statutory or regulatory authority is modified or when
certain other changes occur. Most commonly, State program revisions are
necessitated by changes to EPA's regulations in 40 CFR Parts 260-268
and 124 and 270.
B. North Carolina
North Carolina initially received final authorization for its base
RCRA program effective on December 31, 1984, (49 FR 48694). North
Carolina most recently received final authorization effective November
27, 1995, for the provisions of RCRA Cluster III. Today, North Carolina
is seeking approval of additional program revisions in accordance with
40 CFR 271.21(b)(3).
EPA has reviewed North Carolina's application and has made an
immediate final decision that North Carolina's hazardous waste program
revisions satisfy all of the requirements necessary to qualify for
final authorization. Consequently, EPA intends to grant final
authorization for the additional program modifications to North
Carolina. The public may submit written comments on EPA's immediate
final decision up until May 28, 1996.
Copies of North Carolina's application for these program revisions
are available for inspection and copying at the locations indicated in
the ``Addresses'' section of this notice.
Approval of North Carolina's program revisions shall become
effective June 24, 1996, unless an adverse comment pertaining to the
State's revisions discussed in this notice is received by the end of
the comment period.
If an adverse comment is received EPA will publish either (1) a
withdrawal of the immediate final decision or (2) a notice containing a
response to comments which either affirms that the immediate final
decision takes effect or reverses the decision.
EPA shall administer any RCRA hazardous waste permits, or portions
of permits that contain conditions based upon the Federal program
provisions for which the State is applying for authorization and which
were issued by EPA prior to the effective date of this authorization.
EPA will suspend issuance of any further permits under the provisions
for which the State is being authorized on the effective date of this
authorization.
North Carolina is today seeking authority to administer the
following Federal requirements promulgated between July 1, 1993, and
June 30, 1994.
[[Page 18285]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal requirement HSWA or FR reference Promulgation State authority
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHECKLIST 125 Boilers and Industrial 58 FR 38816.......... July 20, 1993........... N.C.G.S. 130A-
Furnaces; Changes for Consistency with 294(c)(1)
New Air Regulations. N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(7)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(15)
N.C.G.S. 150B-21.6
15A NCAC 13A.0001(e)
15A NCAC 13A.0011(e)
15A NCAC 13A.0011(f)
CHECKLIST 126 Testing and Monitoring 58 FR 46040.......... Aug. 31, 1993........... N.C.G.S. 130A-
Activities. 294(c)(1)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(1a)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(2)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(7)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(14)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(15)
N.C.G.S. 150B-21.6
15A NCAC 13A.0001(e)
15A NCAC 13A.0003(b)
15A NCAC 13A.0006(c)
15A NCAC 13A.0006(e)
15A NCAC 13A.0009(k)
15A NCAC 13A.0009(o)
15A NCAC 13A.0010(n)
15A NCAC 13A.0010(j)
15A NCAC 13A.0012(a)
15A NCAC 13A.0012(c)
15A NCAC 13A.0012(e)
15A NCAC 13A.0013(a)
15A NCAC 13A.0013(b)
15A NCAC 13A.0013(i)
CHECKLIST 127 Boilers and Industrial 58 FR 59598.......... Nov. 9, 1993............ N.C.G.S. 130A-
Furnaces; Administrative Stay and 294(c)(1)
Interim Standards for Bevill Residues. N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(7)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(15)
N.C.G.S. 150B-21.6
15A NCAC 13A.0011(e)
15A NCAC 13A.0011(f)
CHECKLIST 128 Waste from the use of 59 FR 458............ Jan. 4, 1994............ N.C.G.S. 130A-
Chlorophenolic Formulations in Wood 294(c)(1)
Surface Protection. N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(15)
N.C.G.S. 150B-21.6
15A NCAC 13A.0001(e)
15A NCAC 13A.0006(e)
CHECKLIST 129 Revision of Conditional 59 FR 8362........... Feb. 18, 1994........... N.C.G.S. 130A-
Exemption for Small Scale Treatability 294(c)(1)
Studies. N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(15)
N.C.G.S. 150B-21.6
15A NCAC 13A.0006(a)
CHECKLIST 130 Recycled Used Oil 59 FR 10550.......... Mar. 4, 1994............ N.C.G.S. 130A-294(b)
Management Standards; Technical N.C.G.S. 130A-
Amendments and Correction II. 294(c)(1)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(15)
N.C.G.S. 150B-21.6
15A NCAC 13A.0018(a)
15A NCAC 13A.0018(b)
15A NCAC 13A.0018(c)
15A NCAC 13A.0018(e)
15A NCAC 13A.0018(f)
15A NCAC 13A.0018(g)
CHECKLIST 131 Recordkeeping Instruction: 59 FR 13891.......... Mar. 24, 1994........... N.C.G.S. 130A-
Technical Amendments. 294(c)(2)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(15)
N.C.G.S. 150B-21.6
15A NCAC 13A.0009(y)
15A NCAC 13A.0010(v)
CHECKLIST 132 Wood Surface Protection; 59 FR 28484.......... June 2, 1994............ N.C.G.S. 130A-
Correction. 294(c)(1)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(15)
N.C.G.S. 150B-21.6
15A NCAC 13A.0001(e)
CHECKLIST 133 Letter of Credit Revision.. 59 FR 29958.......... June 10, 1994........... N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(7)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(10)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(15)
N.C.G.S. 150B-21.6
15A NCAC 13A.0009(i)
[[Page 18286]]
CHECKLIST 134 Correction of Beryllium 59 FR 31551.......... June 20, 1994........... N.C.G.S. 130A-
Powder (PO15) Listing. 294(c)(1)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(7)
N.C.G.S. 130A-
294(c)(15)
N.C.G.S. 150B-21.6
15A NCAC 13A.0006(d)
15A NCAC 13A.0006(e)
15A NCAC 13A.0012(c)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Decision
I conclude that North Carolina's application for these program
revisions meets all of the statutory and regulatory requirements
established by RCRA. Accordingly, North Carolina is granted final
authorization to operate its hazardous waste program as revised.
North Carolina now has responsibility for permitting treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities within its borders and carrying out
other aspects of the RCRA program, subject to the limitations of its
program revision application and previously approved authorities. North
Carolina also has primary enforcement responsibilities, although EPA
retains the right to conduct inspections under Section 3007 of RCRA and
to take enforcement actions under sections 3008, 3013, and 7003 of
RCRA.
Compliance With Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from the
requirements of Section 6 of Executive Order 12866.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. When a written statement is needed for an EPA rule, section
205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, giving
them meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising them on compliance with the
regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. EPA does not anticipate that the approval of
North Carolina's hazardous waste program referenced in today's notice
will result in annual costs of $100 million or more.
EPA's approval of state programs generally has a deregulatory
effect on the private sector because once it is determined that a state
hazardous waste program meets the requirements of RCRA section 3006(b)
and the regulations promulgated thereunder at 40 CFR Part 271, owners
and operators of hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal
facilities (TSDFs) may take advantage of the flexibility that an
approved state may exercise. Such flexibility will reduce, not increase
compliance costs for the private sector. Thus, today's rule is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The Agency recognizes that small governments may own and/
or operate TSDFs that will become subject to the requirements of an
approved state hazardous waste program. However, such small governments
which own and/or operate TSDFs are already subject to the requirements
in 40 CFR Parts 264, 265, and 270. Once EPA authorizes a state to
administer its own hazardous waste program and any revisions to that
program, these same small governments will be able to own and operate
their TSDFs with increased levels of flexibility provided under the
approved state program.
Certification Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 605(b), I hereby certify
that this authorization will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. This authorization effectively
suspends the applicability of certain Federal regulations in favor of
North Carolina's program, thereby eliminating duplicative requirements
for handlers of hazardous waste in the State. It does not impose any
new burdens on small entities. This rule, therefore, does not require a
regulatory flexibility analysis.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous materials transportation,
Hazardous waste, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water pollution control,
Water supply.
Authority: This notice is issued under the authority of Sections
2002(a), 3006 and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended
(42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b)).
Dated: April 4, 1996.
Phyllis P. Harris,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-10101 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10100 National Oil and Hazardous Sustances Contingency Plan National Priorities List
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18286-18287]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10100]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 18287]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[FRL-5458-9]
National Oil and Hazardous Sustances Contingency Plan National
Priorities List
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of deletion of Lee's Lane Superfund Site, Louisville,
Kentucky from the National Priorities List.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announces the
deletion of the Lees Lane Superfund Site in Louisville, Kentucky, from
the National Priorities List (NPL), which is Appendix B of 40 CFR Part
300 of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan
(NCP). EPA and the Commonwealth of Kentucky have determined that all
appropriate Fund-financed responses under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), as
amended, have been implemented and that no further cleanup is
appropriate. Moreover, EPA and the Commonwealth of Kentucky determined
that response actions conducted at the site to date have been
protective of public health, welfare, and the environment.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Liza Montalvo, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, North
Superfund Remedial Branch, 345 Courtland Street NE., Atlanta, GA 30365,
(404) 347-7791, extension 2030.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The site to be deleted from the NPL is: Lees
Lane Landfill Superfund Site, Louisville, Kentucky.
A Notice of Intent to Delete for this site was published on May 16,
1988 (SW-FRL-3380-7). A Revised Notice of Intent to Delete was
published on February 14, 1992 (FRL-4102-6). The closing date for
comments on the Revised Notice of Intent to Delete was March 16, 1992.
EPA received two comment letters, one from the Kentucky Resources
Council (KRC) and the other from the Kentucky Natural Resources and
Environmental Protection Cabinet (KNREPC). The KRC expressed its
opposition to the Site's deletion stating that the remedy was not fully
protective of the environment. EPA responded that the selected remedy
protected human health and the environment by mitigating human
exposures to contaminated Site media, and reducing continued
uncontrolled releases to the environment. The KNREPC stated in its
letter that the drums of hazardous waste which were discovered and
removed from the Site in March 1992 by KNREPC were apparently left from
the original disposal activities but had not been addressed by EPA's
response action. EPA replied that such drums were likely placed there
in the months preceding their discovery, and were not left on the Site
at the close of EPA's response actions, or during the conduct of O&M
activities. The KRC and the KNREPC expressed in their respective
letters that the scope of waste disposal activities were never fully
characterized at the Site. EPA responded that the estimated volume of
waste buried at the Site was 2,400,000 yd \3\. EPA also explained the
basis for this estimate, and how the Site was characterized. These
comments and EPA's responses are documented in more detail in the
Responsiveness Summary which is available through the EPA Region 4
public docket located at EPA's Region 4 Office, 345 Courtland, St,
N.E., Atlanta, Ga., 30365.
EPA identifies sites that appear to present a significant risk to
public health, welfare, or the environment and it maintains the NPL as
the list of those sites. Any site deleted from the NPL remains eligible
for Fund-financed remedial actions in the unlikely event that
conditions at the site warrant such action in the future. Section
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that Fund-financed actions may be taken
at sites deleted from the NPL. Deletion of a site from the NPL does not
affect responsible party liability or impede agency efforts to recover
costs associated with response efforts.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Dated: March 25, 1996.
Phyllis P. Harris,
Acting Regional Administrator, USEPA Region 4.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 300 is amended
as follows:
PART 300--[AMENDED]
The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O.
12777, 56 FR 54757; 3 CFR 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR
2923; 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.
Appendix B [Amended]
2. Table 1 of appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing the
site Lees Lane Landfill, Louisville, Kentucky.
[FR Doc. 96-10100 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10099 State of Tennessee Request for Approval of Section 112(l) Authority
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18280-18281]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10099]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[FRL-5458-7]
State of Tennessee Request for Approval of Section 112(l)
Authority
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: State of Tennessee has applied for approval of its Rule No.
1200-3-11-.08, Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other
Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities; and also Rule No.
1200-3-11-.17, National Emission Standard for Radon Emissions From
Department of Energy Facilities, under section 112(l) of the Clean Air
Act (CAA) as amended November 15, 1990. The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has reviewed the State of Tennessee's submittal and has
made the decision that the State of Tennessee's Rule No. 1200-3-11-.08
and Rule No. 1200-3-11-.17, satisfies all of the requirements necessary
to qualify as a complete submittal. Thus, the EPA intends to take
comment on whether the State of Tennessee's Rule No. 1200-3-11-.08 and
Rule No. 1200-
[[Page 18281]]
3-11-.17, should be implemented and enforced in place of the EPA's 40
CFR part 61, subpart H, and 40 CFR part 61, subpart Q, respectively.
The State of Tennessee's submittal is available for public review and
comment.
DATES: This action will be effective on June 10, 1996 unless adverse or
critical comments are received by May 28, 1996. If the effective date
is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the State of Tennessee's submittal are available
during normal business hours at the following addresses for inspection
and copying:
Division of Air Pollution Control, Tennessee Department of Environment
and Conservation, L & C Annex, 9th Floor, 401 Church Street, Nashville,
Tennessee;
U.S. EPA Headquarters Library, PM 211A, 401 M Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20460, Phone: (202) 382-5926; and
U.S. EPA Region 4, Regional Library, 345 Courtland St., NE., Atlanta,
GA 30365, Phone: (404) 347-3555, x6050.
Written comments should be sent to Douglas Neeley, EPA Region 4, Air
Programs Branch, 345 Courtland St, NE., Atlanta, GA 30365, Phone: (404)
347-3555, x4176, and should be submitted concurrently to Mr. John W.
Walton, P.E., Director, Division of Air Pollution Control, Tennessee
Department of Environment and Conservation, L & C Annex, 9th Floor, 401
Church Street, Nashville, Tennessee 37243-1531, Phone: (615) 532-0554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lee Page, EPA Region 4, Air Programs Branch, 345 Courtland St, NE.,
Atlanta, GA 30365, Phone: (404) 347-3555, x4199.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background.
Section 112(l) of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990, enables the
EPA to approve State air toxics programs or rules to operate in place
of the Federal air toxics program. Approval is granted by the EPA if
the Agency finds that the State program or rule: (1) is ``no less
stringent'' than the corresponding Federal rule or program, (2)
provides adequate authority and resources, (3) provides a schedule for
implementation and compliance that is sufficiently expeditious, and (4)
is otherwise in compliance with Federal guidance.
B. The State of Tennessee rule 1200-3-11-.08, Emission Standards
for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of
Energy Facilities, and rule 1200-3-11-.17, National Emission Standards
for Radon Emissions From Department of Energy Facilities, are verbatim
the Federal rules 40 CFR part 61, subpart H, and 40 CFR part 61,
subpart Q, respectively.
EPA is approving the State of Tennessee's rule No. 1200-3-11-.08
and rule No. 1200-3-11-.17, as a direct final rule without prior
proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial delegation
request and anticipates no adverse comments. If no adverse comments are
received in response to this direct final rule, no further activity is
contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule
will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in
a subsequent action. Any parties interested in commenting on this
action should do so at this time.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air Pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: This notice is issued under the authority of Title
III of the Clean Air Act as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2399.
Dated: March 12, 1996.
Bruce P. Miller,
Acting Division Director.
[FR Doc. 96-10099 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-10075 Airworthiness Directives; Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale and Eurocopter France Model SA-365N, N1, and N2 Helicopters
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18236-18238]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10075]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-SW-01-AD; Amendment 39-9577; AD 96-09-03]
Airworthiness Directives; Societe Nationale Industrielle
Aerospatiale and Eurocopter France Model SA-365N, N1, and N2
Helicopters
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),
applicable to Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale and
Eurocopter France Model SA-365N, N1,
[[Page 18237]]
and N2 helicopters, that requires an inspection of the door jettison
systems to determine if the handle shafts are locked to the jettison
systems. If the inspection indicates the handle shafts are locked to
the jettison systems, this AD requires installation of a snapwire on
the jettison systems and a visual inspection of the door jettison
handles to determine whether two spring pins are installed, and
installation of a second spring pin, if necessary. If the initial
inspection indicates that the handle shafts are not locked to the
jettison systems, this AD requires replacement of the sheared spring
pin with two spring pins. This amendment is prompted by a factory
inspection performed by the manufacturer that revealed that the forward
passenger door jettison handles may have been fitted with one spring
pin instead of two spring pins at the door jettison handle attachment
points. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent a loss
of the doors in flight and subsequent damage to the horizontal
stabilizer, main fin, or lateral fins.
EFFECTIVE DATE: May 30, 1996.
ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be
obtained from American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 Forum Drive, Grand
Prairie, Texas 75053-4005. This information may be examined at the FAA,
Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663,
Fort Worth, Texas.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Richard Monschke, Aerospace
Engineer, Rotorcraft Standards Staff, FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone (817) 222-5116, fax
(817) 222-5961.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness
directive (AD) that is applicable to Societe Nationale Industrielle
Aerospatiale and Eurocopter France Model SA-365N, N1, and N2
helicopters was published in the Federal Register on November 2, 1995
(60 FR 55681). That action proposed to require, within 30 days after
the effective date of the AD, an inspection of the door jettison
systems to determine if the handle shafts were locked to the jettison
systems. If the inspection indicated the handle shafts were locked to
the jettison systems, that action proposed to require installation of a
snapwire on the jettison systems and within 500 hours time-in-service,
a visual inspection of the door jettison handles to determine whether
two spring pins were installed, and installation of a second spring
pin, if necessary. If the initial inspection indicated that the handle
shafts were not locked to the jettison systems, the action proposed to
require, before further flight, replacement of the sheared spring pin
with two spring pins.
Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate
in the making of this amendment. No comments were received on the
proposal or the FAA's determination of the cost to the public. The FAA
has determined that air safety and the public interest require the
adoption of the rule as proposed, except for various non-substantive
editorial changes and deleting the incorporation by reference of the
service bulletin. The FAA has determined that these changes will
neither increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the
scope of the AD.
The FAA estimates that 27 helicopters of U.S. registry will be
affected by this AD, that it will take approximately 8 work hours per
helicopter to accomplish the actions, and that the average labor rate
is $60 per work hour. Required parts will cost approximately $230 per
helicopter. Based on these figures, the total cost impact of the AD on
U.S. operators is estimated to be $19,170.
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is
not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866;
(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) will not have a
significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial
number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action
and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained
from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption
ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding a new airworthiness directive
to read as follows:
AD 96-09-03 Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale and
Eurocopter France (Eurocopter France): Amendment 39-9577. Docket No.
95-SW-01-AD.
Applicability: Model SA-365N, N1, and N2 helicopters, serial
numbers (S/N) 6008, 6033, 6083, 6084, 6085, 6093, 6120 and higher
that have not been modified in accordance with Avis De Modification
(AMS) 365A07-56B15, certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For helicopters that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must use the authority
provided in paragraph (b) to request approval from the FAA. This
approval may address either no action, if the current configuration
eliminates the unsafe condition, or different actions necessary to
address the unsafe condition described in this AD. Such a request
should include an assessment of the effect of the changed
configuration on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no
case does the presence of any modification, alteration, or repair
remove any helicopter from the applicability of this AD.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent a loss of the doors in flight and subsequent damage
to the horizontal stabilizer, main fin, or lateral fins, accomplish
the following:
(a) Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, for both
the left and right forward passenger door jettison systems, cut the
snapwire on the door jettison handle, and, without turning the
handle completely, determine whether the handle is locked to the
jettison mechanism.
(1) If the door jettison handle shaft is locked to the jettison
system,
(i) Install the snapwire, part number (P/N) L23321, or annealed
copper safety wire, black enameled, 0.3mm diameter, on each door
jettison handle.
(ii) Within 500 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective
date of this AD, accomplish the following in accordance with the
applicable maintenance manual:
(A) Remove the doors and remove the trimming panels from the
passenger door posts. Visually inspect each door to determine
whether two spring pins are installed to fasten each jettison
handle.
[[Page 18238]]
(B) If only one spring pin is installed, install a second spring
pin.
(C) Reinstall the trimming panel.
(D) Reinstall the door.
(E) Install the snapwire as specified in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of
this AD.
(2) If a door jettison handle shaft is not locked to the
jettison system, before further flight, accomplish the following.
(i) Remove the door and the trimming panel.
(ii) Remove the sheared spring pin.
(iii) Replace the sheared spring pin with two spring pins.
(iv) Reinstall the door trimming panels.
(v) Reinstall the door.
(vi) Install the snapwire as described in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of
this AD.
Note 2: Eurocopter Service Bulletin SA 365, No. 01.38, dated
January 31, 1994, pertains to this AD.
(b) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used when approved by the Manager, Rotorcraft Standards Staff, FAA,
Rotorcraft Directorate. Operators shall submit their requests
through an FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may concur or
comment and then send it to the Manager, Rotorcraft Standards Staff.
Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Rotorcraft Standards Staff.
(c) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the helicopter to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(d) This amendment becomes effective on May 30, 1996.
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on April 18, 1996.
Eric Bries,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 96-10075 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.