DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE Last updated 8/ 11/ 05 Staff Work Paper On the Use of Air Quality Data Related to Exceptional and Natural Events for the Particulate Matter Standards U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air and Radiation Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711 DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE ii Contents Section I Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Section II What are the goals of this Policy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Section III Purpose and Management of Flagging Data in the Air Quality System ( AQS) Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Section IV Uses of flagged data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.1 General guidelines on the use of flagged data . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.2 Use of Air Quality Data for National Air Ambient Quality Standards ( NAAQS) Compliance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.3 State Implementation Plan ( SIP) Regulatory Activities . . . . 6 Section V Submittal of documentation related to flagged data . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1 Requirement to Provide Appropriate Documentation of Exceptional, Natural, or International Events . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Section VI Natural Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6.1 The natural events covered by this policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6.2 Volcanic and seismic activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6.3 Unwanted or wild fires . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.4 High wind events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.5 Response to NAAQS violations due to natural events . . . . 12 6.6 Development of the Natural Events Action Plan ( NEAP) . . 13 6.7 Does the NEAP have to be included in the State Implementation Plan? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.8 When must a State develop a NEAP? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.9 How does the NEAP apply to areas designated as DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE iii nonattainment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6.10 Failure to develop or implement a NEAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6.11 Natural event emissions transported from international sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Section VII Exceptional Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7.1 Criteria for identification of exceptional events . . . . . . . . . 16 7.5 Chemical Spills and Industrial Accidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 7.9 Infrequent Large Gatherings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7.11 Clean Up After A Major Disaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7.12 Development Of An Exceptional Event Mitigation Action Plan ( EEMAP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7.13 Response to NAAQS Violations Due To Exceptional Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7.14 Failure To Develop Or Implement and EEMAP . . . . . . . . 19 Section VIII Stagnation and Inversion Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 8.1 Stagnation/ Inversions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE 1 For the purpose of this document, the term Particulate Matter refers to PM2.5 and PM10 2.5. For PM10, issues related to natural events will continue to be addressed via the memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation to EPA Regional Offices titled, " Areas Affected by PM10 Natural Events", May 30, 1996. For PM10, exceptional events will also continue to be addressed under the " Guideline on the Identification and Use of Air Quality Data Affected by Exceptional Events", July 1986 until the standard for PM 10 has been revoked.

2 Under the Tribal Authority Rule ( TAR), eligible Tribes may develop Tribal Implementation Plans to administer Clean Air Act ( CAA) requirements on Tribal lands. The CAA recognizes Tribal governments as the most appropriate parties to regulate the environment on Tribal lands and grants EPA the authority to approve Tribal programs. The EPA has developed strategies for Federally implementing CAA requirements if Tribes do not adopt TIP's. In cases where a Tribal air quality agency has implemented an air quality monitoring network which is impacted by emissions from exceptional, natural, or International events the policies identified in this guidance document may be used to discount data for regulatory purposes. In cases where a Tribe may need assistance in meeting some or all of the requirements related to the guidance in this document EPA has the responsibility to assist the Tribal government in meeting the requirements. Section 1 Introduction This document provides guidance on identifying, evaluating, interpreting, and using data related to the Particulate Matter ( PM 2.5 and PM10 2.5) standards where State, local, and Tribal air control agencies are requesting that the data be treated as being affected by exceptional or natural events. 12 Certain events are considered to be exceptional for two reasons: ( 1) they are not expected to recur routinely at a given location, or ( 2) they are determined to be uncontrollable or un preventable. For the purpose of this document, the definition of natural events are defined as those events that are due to an act of nature which also contributes to emissions that either cause or significantly contribute to violations of the Particulate Matter national air ambient quality standards ( NAAQS). The natural events that will be covered under this document are high wind events, volcanic and seismic activities, and wild fires. Natural events that are international in origin, but are determined to have caused or significantly contributed to violations of the Particulate Matter NAAQS, at locations within the United States, will also be covered under this document. DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE 2 3 Appendix K pertains specifically to the PM10 standard. However, it contains important information regarding the definition of exceptional events. Consequently, the provisions of appendices K and N should be considered together as comprising the authority and basic concepts underlying the exceptional and natural events policies discussed in this document. The Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) has adopted rules governing decisions concerning data that are determined to be affected by these types of episodic events pursuant to 40 CFR Part 50, Appendices K, I and N3. Appendices K and N generally set forth what is needed to determine whether the PM10 and PM2.5 standards respectively are being met, based on three consecutive, complete calendar years of air quality data. Appendix I sets forth what is needed to determine whether the ozone standards are being met. Appendices K, I, and N, of 40 CFR Part 50, allow EPA to apply special consideration to data affected by exceptional and natural events. Several guidance documents have previously been issued by EPA concerning episodic events related to exceptional and natural events. This document supersedes all of these documents as they relate to the implementation of the Particulate Matter standards with the exception of the PM 10 standard.

While all valid ambient air quality data should be submitted to EPA via the Air Quality System ( AQS) database for use in making regulatory decisions, Appendices K, I, and N provide that in some cases it may be appropriate for the Regional Administrator to discount, weight, or make adjustments to the data that has been appropriately flagged in the AQS database from calculations in determining whether an area has attained the standard or not. These decisions are to be made on a case by case basis using all available information related to the event in question, and should be made available to the public for review. In order to make sure that decisions concerning the discounting of data for regulatory purposes are handled in a consistent manner, affected air quality agencies are encouraged to follow the guidance in this document, as well as other related guidance documents in making decisions concerning how to handle air quality data determined to be affected by exceptional or natural events.

Section 2 What are the goals of this Policy?

This policy applies to the Particulate Matter standards, and relates to measured concentrations determined to be impacted by exceptional or natural events. The policy addresses concentrations of Particulate Matter which may adversely impact public health, prevent affected areas from meeting the NAAQS, or cause a misinterpretation of the data related to whether an area is meeting the NAAQS. The goals of this policy are: ( 1) to identify reasonable actions that should be taken to address the air quality and public health impacts caused by these types of events, and ( 2) to avoid imposing unreasonable planning requirements on States related to traditional sources of Particulate Matter in such areas.

This document provides general definitions of exceptional and natural events and provides DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE 3 4 Data flagged as due to an exceptional or natural event may be discounted on a case by case basis, depending on a concurrence by the Regional Office, which will be based on the documentation submitted by the reporting agency to substantiate the exceptional or natural events claim. If the Regional Office provides a concurrence on the event flag in the AQS database the data will be discounted when calculating the design value for the area. The data may also be discounted for the design value calculation for an area in conjunction with other EPA guidance, such as the " Clean Data Policy", or the " Limited Maintenance Plan Option", where applicable for a pollutant. guidance concerning what actions should be taken in the event that data at an air quality monitoring site are determined to be impacted by such events.

General guidance will be provided in this document that will allow State, local, and Tribal air quality agencies to flag data appropriately in the AQS database that is determined to be affected by emissions from one or more of the events addressed in this document. For the purpose of this document exceptional and natural events are defined as follow:

1. Exceptional event: An event that is not expected to occur routinely at a given location, or that is determined not to be reasonably controllable or preventable, but is determined to have caused or significantly contributed to an exceedance or violation of the NAAQS.

2. Natural event: An event that is caused by an act of nature and is determined to have caused or significantly contributed to an exceedance or violation of the NAAQS.

The policy described in this document addresses Particulate Matter NAAQS exceedances or violations that have been caused by either exceptional or natural events in areas that are designated as nonattainment, attainment, or unclassifiable4. This policy applies at the time that the State makes a determination that a Particulate Matter NAAQS has been violated due to one or more of the aforementioned types of events and addresses the question of what should be done to protect public health. The policy provides that EPA will: ( 1) exercise its discretion under section 107( d)( 3) to not redesignate areas as nonattainment or reclassify existing nonattainment areas to higher classifications where one of these types of events has significantly impacted a monitoring site and caused an exceedance or violation of a NAAQS provided that the State formally commits to the development of a plan to address public health impacts related to the event, ( 2) where exceptional or natural events are concerned EPA agrees to use its discretion not to redesignate an area as nonattainment, or reclassify an existing nonattainment area by discounting the data from regulatory consideration if the State provides adequate and compelling documentation to substantiate the exceptional or natural event claim by applying Appendix N related to the Particulate Matter standards. DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE 4 5 The annual PM 2.5 standard is met when the 3 year average annual mean concentration is less than or equal to 15.0 ug/ m3. The 24 hour standard for PM 2.5 is met when the 3 year average of the 98th percentile values at each monitoring site is less than or equal to 65 ug/ m3. If natural events cause the annual standard not to be met, only one Natural Events Action Plan ( NEAP) will be required for the area to cover both the annual and the 24 hour standard. This guidance also attempts to maintain some of the traditional delineations of episodic event types, such as chemical spills and clean up activities after a major disaster, yet focuses treatment of such data according to the predictability and controllability of the event in question. For instance, for an event that can reasonably be anticipated, but which is not expected to recur at the same location, the State, local, or Tribal agency will be expected to develop a plan to mitigate the risks of public exposure related to the event. For an event that can not reasonably be anticipated, and which is unlikely to recur at the same location ( e. g., A major disaster, industrial accidents, or chemical spills etc..), the guidance requires a post event action plan to ensure prompt clean up of debris related to the event and calls for measures to be taken that will mitigate the impact of the event on the public. For events that may recur, yet may not be fully controllable ( e. g., international transport), the guidance requires that reasonable action be taken to address local sources where appropriate, as well as to inform the public and mitigate the impact of such events on public health.

In cases where a State, local, or Tribal agency has taken action to adopt and implement plans intended to address exceptional and natural events, EPA will take this information into consideration in making decisions to discount data affected by these types of events.

The guiding principles that were followed in the development of this policy are the following:

1. Protection of public health is the highest priority of Federal, State, Tribal, and local air pollution control agencies.

2. The public must be informed whenever the air quality in an area is unhealthy.

3. All valid ambient air quality data should be submitted to the EPA AQS and made available for public access.

4. State, local, and Tribal air quality agencies must take appropriate and reasonable measures to safeguard public health regardless of the source of the Particulate Matter emissions.

5. Emission controls should be applied to sources that contribute to exceedances or violations of the Particulate Matter NAAQS when the controls will result in fewer exceedances or violations of the standards. 5 Section 3 DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE 5 Purpose and Management of Flagging Data in the AQS Database The principal purpose of the data flagging system in the AQS database is to identify those air quality measurements that are influenced by either exceptional or natural events. These are events which, if unidentified, could lead to possible misinterpretation or misuse of data. If a particular air quality measurement is influenced by an exceptional or natural event it is important that those who may review and ultimately use it to be aware of this influence and ensure that such data are not misinterpreted or misused. Knowledge and understanding of what the data represent are critical in the overall air quality planning process.

Under the data flagging system State, local, and Tribal air pollution control agencies are responsible for identifying and documenting data that is believed to be influenced by exceptional or natural events. These agencies are also expected to develop the appropriate background information that is to be used to support the decision to flag an individual piece of data. These agencies are also expected to submit the information documenting the event to the appropriate EPA Regional Office for concurrence and make it available for public review. Because of the potential implications related to the use of flagged data, the agency that is flagging the data must demonstrate that there is a clear causal relationship between the event in question and the air quality data that is being flagged. It is not sufficient to merely show that an event occurred. The reporting agency must demonstrate compellingly that the event occurred and that it caused or significantly contributed to the data being contested at the monitoring site in question.

Section 4 Uses of flagged data 4.1 General Guidelines On The Use Of Flagged Data A general concern on the part of States, local, and Tribal air quality agencies is the potential for misuse of data affected by exceptional and natural events. This concern has prompted EPA to develop the criteria in this document to help determine what actions should be taken if air quality data is determined to be significantly affected by one or more of these types of events. This document requires State, local, and Tribal air quality agencies, as well as EPA, to identify and explain the use, or the non use, of data determined to be influenced by exceptional or natural events during a public review process.

In general, decisions concerning the use or non use of flagged data will be made on a case by case basis, and the public must be informed that the data exist, whether the data are used in regulatory decisions or not. The main concern related to this issue lies with the understanding of what the flagged data represent. Four steps should be taken in order to decide whether questionable data should be flagged, and to assist potential users in determining how the data should be used. The first step is to determine whether the measured value at the monitoring site DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE 6 in question is attributed to the event under consideration. The second step is to determine what portion of the measured air quality level is attributable to the event in question, as well as the cumulative effect of several similar exceptional or natural events that create significant impacts at particular monitoring sites. In some cases, modeling ( either source apportionment or dispersion) or other procedures may be used to determine the relative contribution of the event in question. The relative contribution of the event provides a better understanding of what the air quality level of the day, or days in question, actually represent.

The third step is to identify the area that has been influenced by the event. In most cases, the impact will be limited. Therefore, if the data are being considered for either use in or discounting from the regulatory process, the reporting agency is required to identify the area that would be influenced by the determination.

The fourth step is to demonstrate how the flagged data relates to previously collected data at the monitoring site in question. This is required in order to provide an historical perspective related to the concentration levels at the monitoring site, as well as the types of sources that normally contribute to impacts at the monitor. This step is extremely critical for trends analyses and for determining the exceptional nature, recurrent nature, the frequency of the event in question, as well as for preparation of reports to the public on air quality levels for a given area. If flagged data are used or discounted in preparing summaries of air quality data, the public should be made aware of how the data were used.

4.2 Use Of Air Quality Data For NAAQS Compliance The NAAQS compliance status involves the use of air quality data to determine whether the area represented by the data is meeting or exceeding the NAAQS for the pollutant being monitored. It is EPA's policy, and a regulatory requirement, to submit valid data ( i. e., data collected in accordance with 40 CFR Part 58) to the AQS database. All data, flagged or unflagged, should be available to the public for comparison to the NAAQS to determine if exceedances have occurred. All relevant flagged data along with the reasons for the data being flagged, and a demonstration of causality between the event in question and the flagged data, is required to be submitted for consideration of use/ non use during the public hearing or comment period called for under sections 107, 110 113, 119, 120, 122, 123, 126, Part C or Part D of the Clean Air Act ( CAA).

4.3 State Implementation Plan ( SIP) Regulatory Activities The use of flagged air quality data for SIP regulatory activities ( area wide, regional, or local control strategy development, SIP design values, attainment/ non attainment status, enforcement actions, etc.) shall be considered on a case by case basis and discussed during the public review process. The discounting of the flagged data for regulatory purposes would only be allowed if the reporting agency determines in conjunction with a public review that the flagged data are inappropriate for such use. In cases where the implementation of control measures would be appropriate and meaningful, the State, local, or Tribal air quality agency should consult DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE 7 6 A State, local, or Tribal air quality agency may also flag data determined to be affected by exceptional or natural events that is below the standard where there is a determination that the data may later have an impact on the annual standard for either PM2.5 or PM10 2.5. The reporting agency must, however, provide adequate documentation which shows that the event occurred and that the event either caused or significantly contributed to the measured value under consideration. The appropriate Regional Office is required to make a determination that the documentation provided is adequate enough to substantiate the exceptional or natural event claim. current EPA guidance for Particulate Matter, as well as the appropriate EPA Regional Office, to determine what measures would be appropriate to properly control the sources that are determined to contribute to the exceptional or natural event in question.

Section 5 Submittal of documentation related to flagged data 5.1 Requirement to Provide Adequate And Compelling Documentation Of Exceptional Or Natural Events In circumstances where a State, local, or Tribal air quality agency has reason to believe that an exceptional or natural event has caused or significantly contributed to measured exceedances or a violation of the Particulate Matter NAAQS, the State is responsible for establishing a clear causal relationship between the measured exceedance or violation and the event in question6. Supporting documentation concerning the event should include, but is not limited to some of the following types of information: trajectory analysis, filter analysis, meteorological data ( e. g., wind speed and wind direction to support a source receptor relationship), modeling and source receptor analysis, videos and/ or photographs of the event and the resulting emissions, satellite images of the event, maps of the area showing sources of emissions and the area affected by the event, as well as news accounts of the event.

The type and degree of documentation provided for an event should be sufficient to demonstrate compellingly that the event occurred, and that it impacted, and caused or significantly contributed to the measured values under consideration at a particular monitoring site. The State, local, or Tribal air quality agency should also make sure that the documentation related to the event in question is made available for public review. This may be accomplished in a number of ways such as the publishing of newspaper announcements related to the event, or other news media, periodic reports on air quality in the area, and through public hearings. This would allow the public an opportunity to comment on whether the causal relationship between the event and the air quality measurement is compelling and whether the data should be discounted or not. Also, open hearings, where State, local, and Tribal regulatory boards can review the documentation are useful forums to notify the public of potentially important policy decisions concerning the event. DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE 8 7 In cases where the Regional Office has requested that additional information be provided and the reporting agency does not provide the additional documentation related to the event within the time period identified in this guidance, the Regional Office may take action to nonconcur on the flag in the AQS database and inform the reporting agency that a decision to provide a nonconcurrence on the data has been made. The term concurrence means that the Regional Office has reviewed the documentation submitted by the reporting agency and has provided an indication that the Regional Office agrees that the data under consideration should be provided special consideration for regulatory purposes due to influence from an exceptional or natural event. Where a Regional Office has provided an nonconcurrence, this means that the Regional Office does not agree with the State's claim that the data has been influenced by an exceptional or natural event, and that the data should not be afforded special consideration for regulatory purposes. In order to promote consistency related to the implementation of the policy, in cases where there is a dispute concerning a decision to concur or nonconcur on a flag in the AQS database, either the reporting agency or the Regional Office may consult the appropriate OAQPS program office for a resolution of the issue. When air quality data affected by an exceptional or natural event are submitted to the AQS database, the State, local, or Tribal air quality agency must request that a flag be placed on the data to indicate that either an exceptional or natural event was involved and that the data should be provided special consideration. Documentation to support the flagged data must also be maintained by the State. A copy of the documentation must be forwarded to the appropriate EPA Regional Office no later than 60 days following the end of the quarter in which the event occurred. In cases where the reporting agency determines that additional time is required to submit the supporting documentation related to the event in question, the reporting agency must contact the appropriate Regional Office to request an extension of the reporting period up to an additional 30 days. The documentation submitted by the State must also be made available on the AQS website by the appropriate Regional Office. The Regional Office is then responsible for providing acknowledgment to the State related to the receipt of the documentation and confirm that the data was concurred or non concurred on within 60 days following the receipt of the documentation from the State. The Regional Office may extend the period for providing concurrence on the flag in the database by a period of no more than 30 days, if there is a determination that there is insufficient documentation to make a decision to concur or nonconcur on the flag related to the event. The Regional Office in this time period may request additional information from the State to further substantiate the claim related to the event. The State will then have a period of 30 days to submit the additional information requested by the Regional Office. Once the Regional Office receives the information requested from the State, the Regional Office will then have 30 days to provide a concurrence or nonconcurrence on the data. 7 In order to assure that prompt action is taken related to data that has been flagged in the AQS database, it is important that the time periods specified be adhered to by both the reporting agency as well as the affected Regional Office.

Section 6 DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE 9 8 This policy can also be applied in Tribal territory where a tribe is authorized to manage its air quality programs. The policy also applies in Tribal areas where Tribes do not have authority under the Tribal Authority Rule ( TAR).

9 The annual PM2.5 standard is met when the 3 year average of the spatially averaged annual means is less than or equal to 15.0 : g/ m3. The 24 hour PM2.5 standard is met when the 3 year average of the 98th percentile values at each monitoring site is less than or equal to 65 : g/ m3. If natural events cause the annual NAAQS to not be met, one NEAP for the area will cover both the 24 hour and annual NAAQS for PM. Natural Events 6.1 The Natural Events Covered By This Policy 8 This policy applies to data affected by a natural event at a Particulate Matter monitoring site where it has been determined that concentrations due to the event( s) have caused or significantly contributed to the NAAQS not being met for an area. 9 The policy applies to three specific categories of natural events that can affect air quality, as well as the attainment, or maintenance of the Particulate Matter NAAQS. The events covered by this policy are: ( 1) volcanic and seismic actives, ( 2) high wind events, and ( 3) unwanted or wild fires. Exceedances or violations of the Particulate Matter NAAQS due to natural events that are international in origin may also be considered under this policy for discounting data from regulatory consideration if the reporting agency provides compelling documentation which sufficiently demonstrates that the event caused or significantly contributed to the measured concentrations at the monitoring site in question.

6.2 Volcanic And Seismic Activities:

Ambient concentrations of Particulate Matter for which volcanic eruptions or seismic activity caused or significantly contributed to high levels of Particulate Matter in an affected area will be treated as natural events. While not occurring frequently, volcanic and seismic activity can affect air quality data related to the Particulate Matter NAAQS for an extended period of time after an event. Volcanic eruptions contribute to ambient concentrations in two ways: ( 1) concentrations due to primary emissions ( e. g., ash), and ( 2) with emissions of precursor pollutants ( e. g., sulfur dioxide) that contribute to the secondary formation of Particulate Matter. Seismic activity ( e. g., earthquakes) can also contribute to ambient Particulate Matter concentrations by shaking the ground, causing structures to collapse and otherwise raising dust.

Emissions attributed to anthropogenic activities that re entrain volcanic ash during the first year ( 12 months) following an event will be treated as due to the natural event. One year is considered an adequate amount of time for cleaning ash deposits from areas where anthropogenic activities ( e. g., vehicle traffic) may cause re entrainment and possible exceedances of the Particulate Matter standards. After a year, however, exceedances or violations due to reentrainment of ash deposits will not be provided special consideration under this policy. DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE10 10 The EPA recognizes and endorses the Federal Wildland Fire Management Policies adopted by the Departments of Interior and Agriculture. These policies refer to all fires on sparsely populated lands managed by Federal agencies ( e. g., national parks, national forests, grasslands, etc.) as wildland fires. The wildland fires term includes unwanted fires that do not meet a prescription ( wildfires), management ignited prescribed fires, and naturally ignited fires that meet a prescription ( prescribed natural fire). 6.3 Unwanted or Wild Fires:

Ambient Particulate Matter concentrations caused by smoke from wildland fires will be treated as due to natural events if the fires are determined to be unwanted fires, not designated or managed as prescribed fires, and requiring appropriate suppression action by a wildland manager. 10 For the purpose of this document, wildland fire natural events are limited to unwanted fires that do not meet a prescription ( wildfires) and, therefore, require appropriate suppression actions. Wildland prescribed fires, the burning of forest, harvest residues, agricultural burning, and fires for land clearing are not covered by this policy. Treatment of air quality data affected by emissions from wildland and prescribed fires that are managed to achieve resource benefits is covered under EPA's " Interim Air Quality Policy on Wildland Prescribed Fires, issued May 15, 1998".

The " Interim Air Quality Policy on Wildland and Prescribed Fires" was developed to address the impacts of air pollutant emissions related to fires which are managed for resource benefits where the State, local, or Tribal air quality agency has taken action to mitigate the impact of the fires on public health and welfare as it relates to impacts on the Particulate Matter NAAQS. The policy provides that EPA will allow State, local, and Tribal air quality agencies flexibility related to their approach to regulating fires managed for resource benefits if the agencies certify that they have adopted and are implementing a certified Smoke Management Plan ( SMP) as required under the policy. If a State, local, or Tribal air quality agency does not certify that a basic SMP is being implemented, as required under the policy, no special consideration will be granted by EPA related to exceedances or violations attributed to fires managed for resource benefits.

6.4 High Wind Events:

High wind events that affect ambient Particulate Matter concentrations due to dust raised by unusually high winds will be treated as due to natural events under the following conditions: ( 1) the dust originated from nonanthropogenic sources, or ( 2) the dust originated from land that was disturbed by anthropogenic activities where the State, local, or Tribal air quality agency has implemented what is determined to be Best Available Control Measures ( BACM) for the affected DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE11 11 In cases where a State, local, or Tribal agency has adopted and implemented BACM level controls on anthropogenic sources determined to be affected by a high wind event, and the event has over powered the controls to cause or significantly contribute to an exceedence or violation of the Particulate Matter standard, EPA will apply this policy to discount the data from regulatory consideration. However, the State, local, or Tribal air quality agency must document that the controls were in place and being implemented, and being complied with, at the time that the event in question occurred. In making a determination concerning what is considered to be BACM for a particular anthropogenic source, the State, local, or Tribal air quality agency should consult current EPA guidance, as well as the affected Regional Office. In some cases the BACM level control for a particular source may be identified as Reasonable Available Control Measures ( RACM). sources consistent with current EPA guidance. 11 The conditions that create fugitive dust emissions from high wind events vary from area to area with soil type, precipitation, and wind speeds. Therefore, the reporting agency must determine the unusually high wind conditions that act to overcome BACM for the affected anthropogenic sources in each region or subregion of the State. The reporting agency is encouraged to consult the appropriate Regional Office in making this determination. The reporting air quality agency should also provide supporting documentation which shows that the average wind speeds experienced on the day or days that the measured values in question were recorded were unusual and untypical for the area during the period under consideration. A presumptive high wind speed is not established under this policy, as was identified in the Guideline on the Identification and Use of Air Quality Data Affected by Exceptional Events, ( Exceptional Events Guideline, EPA 450/ 4 86 007, July 1986). States should provide appropriate documentation to show that the high winds experienced at the monitoring site in question were indeed unusual for the affected area.

The BACM must be implemented at contributing anthropogenic dust sources in order for Particulate Matter NAAQS exceedances to be provided special consideration as due to natural events under this policy. Therefore, BACM level controls must be implemented for anthropogenic dust sources contributing to NAAQS exceedances or violations in attainment, unclassifiable, and nonattainment areas. The EPA will use its flexibility not to redesignate areas as nonattainment where anthropogenic sources have contributed to an exceedance or violation of the Particulate Matter NAAQS where a natural event was involved, if the reporting State, local, or Tribal air quality agency formally commits to implement BACM at the contributing anthropogenic sources.

In attainment and unclassifiable areas, the BACM level controls must be implemented for all contributing anthropogenic sources related to a high wind event within 3 years of the first NAAQS violation. The EPA will also exercise its authority not to reclassify an existing nonattainment area to a higher classification if the State, local, or Tribal agency commits to implement BACM level controls within 3 years of the first NAAQS violation. In these areas, BACM level controls, however, should be implemented as expeditiously as practicable for all DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE12 contributing sources related to the event in question. The conditions that create high wind events vary form area to area with soil type, precipitation and the speed of wind gusts. Therefore, as stated previously, the State must determine the unusually high wind conditions that will overcome BACM for anthropogenic sources in each region or subregion of the State.

The State must also provide compelling documentation to the appropriate Regional Office concerning the flagged event. This documentation must demonstrate that the event occurred and that the event caused or significantly contributed to the exceedance or violation measured at the affected monitoring site.

6.5 Response To NAAQS Violations Due To Natural Events.

If an area fails to meet a NAAQS because one or more Particulate Matter values has been affected by a natural event, the State is required to develop a NEAP to address future events within 18 months of the NAAQS violation. A NEAP should:

1. Establish public notification and education programs. Such programs may be designed to educate the public about the short term and long term harmful effects that high concentrations of Particulate Matter may have on public health and inform the public that: ( a) certain types of natural events affect the air quality of the area periodically, ( b) a natural event is imminent, and ( c) specific actions are being taken to minimize the public health impacts of the events.

2. Minimize public exposure to high concentrations of Particulate Matter due to future natural events. Programs to minimize public exposure should: ( a) identify the people most at risk, ( b) notify the at risk population that a natural event is imminent or currently taking place, ( c) suggest actions to be taken by the public to minimize their exposure to high concentrations of Particulate Matter, and ( d) suggest precautions that should be taken if exposure cannot be avoided.

3. Abate or minimize appropriate contributing controllable sources. Programs to minimize Particulate Matter emissions may include the following:

( a) volcanic and seismic activities  cleaning ash and dust deposits from areas where it would be re entrained into the air by anthropogenic activities;

( b) unwanted or wild fires  prohibition of other burning activities during wild fire events and steps to minimize fuel loadings in areas vulnerable to fire. Appropriate suppression actions, as determined by the wildland manager, should consider the air DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE13 12 The FMP will integrate fire, as a natural ecological process, into land and resource management plans and will form the basis for management actions taken on wildland fires. The FMP must include prescriptions for any use of fire to meet land and resource management objectives. The EPA anticipates that FMPs will achieve an acceptable balance between forest health and public health concerns. Public health concerns caused by the potential effects of smoke on air quality from wildland fires will be addressed in FMP through SMP and other measures. The SMPs attempt to minimize smoke impacts by monitoring fire behavior, meteorology and air quality during the fire and by publicly announcing forecasts of likely smoke conditions in communities impacted by ongoing fires. Since the FMP will treat fire as a natural ecological process, the impact of wildland fires on air quality and regional haze is expected to increase in the future. Therefore, EPA will encourage Federal land management agencies to support air quality monitoring near fires, to assess air and haze impacts, and to develop a fire information data base and regional scale smoke management plans. quality impacts caused by the fires. The Federal Wildland Fire Management Policies require that fire management plans ( FMP) be developed for all Federal lands with burnable vegetation. 12 A goal of an FMP is to prevent NAAQS violations caused by wildland fires.

( c) High winds  application of the BACM level of controls to any source of soil that has been disturbed by anthropogenic activities. Application of BACM level of control measures for an anthropogenic source requires an analysis of the technological and economic feasibility of individual control measures on a case by case basis. The NEAP should include analyses of these types of controls for contributing sources. Controls must be implemented for anthropogenic dust sources contributing to NAAQS exceedances in attainment and unclassifiable areas and in nonattainment areas. In unclassifiable, attainment, and nonattainment areas, control measures must be implemented for those contributing sources for which it has been defined within 3 years of the first NAAQS violation which is attributed to high wind events. In any case, the State, local, or Tribal agency should implement BACM as expeditiously as practicable in order to provide prompt protection of public health. The control measures which may be implemented related to windblown dust include, but are not limited to the application of chemical dust suppressants to unpaved roads, parking lots and open areas; dust suppression at construction sites; use of conservation farming practices on agricultural lands; tree rows and other physical wind breaks; restricting or prohibiting recreational off road vehicle activities; and use of surface coverings. If control measures are not defined for the anthropogenic sources in question, step 4 listed below is required. DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE14 If control measures are not yet required for some dust sources, the State, local, or Tribal agency is required to reach agreements with the appropriate stakeholders to minimize future emissions from such sources using BACM level control measures and include the agreements in the NEAP. Control measures must be implemented for those contributing sources for which it has been defined within18 months after the due date for the NEAP.

4. Identify, study and implement practical mitigating measures as necessary. The EPA believes that good control measures have been defined for most anthropogenic sources of dust, and that those measures should be implemented on the above schedule. However, the NEAP may also include commitments to conduct pilot tests of new emission reduction techniques. For example, it may be desirable to test the feasibility and effectiveness of new strategies for minimizing sources of windblown dust through pilot programs. The plan must include a timely schedule for conducting such studies and implementing the best measures that are technologically and economically feasible. The State should also consult the most current guidance developed by EPA related to the BACM for the affected source.

5. The State must periodically re evaluate: ( a) the conditions causing a Particulate Matter NAAQS to not be met in the area, ( b) the status of implementation of the NEAP, and ( c) the adequacy of the actions being implemented. The State should re evaluate the NEAP for an area every 3 5 years at a minimum and make appropriate revisions to the plan in consultation with the appropriate Regional Office.

6.6 Development Of The NEAP The State, local, or Tribal agency should develop a NEAP in conjunction with the affected stakeholders in the area. When the State, local, or Tribal air quality agency develops a NEAP related to wildland fires, the plan should include input from Federal, State, local, Tribal, and private land managers in areas vulnerable to fire. Also, agencies responsible for suppressing fires and the citizens in the affected area should be involved in developing the plan. Development of a NEAP for high wind events should include input from Federal, State, local, Tribal, and private managers of open desert lands, rangelands, agricultural lands, the construction industry, and organizations promoting the use of recreational off road vehicles and other stakeholders who may be affected by development of the NEAP. Development of a NEAP for volcanic and seismic activities should include, but is not limited to, input from geophysicists and public works officials who will be responsible for removal and disposal of ash deposits. The plan should include documented agreements among the stakeholders delineating planned actions, the implementation schedule, and the parties responsible for carrying out those actions. DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE15 13 In cases where an area is required to implement BACM for a serious or higher classified area, the State is required to adopt these measures and submit them as a part of the SIP for the serious ( or higher classified) area. In cases where a State makes a request to have an are redesignated to attainment, the State must meet the requirements of section 107( d)( 3)( E). This would include the submittal of a maintenance plan as required pursuant to section 175A, and the State must ensure that all anthropogenic control measures required to address the impacts related to natural events, identified as a part of the NEAP, are approved as a part of the maintenance plan. Other portions are the NEAP will not be required to be submitted for approval as a part of the maintenance plan. 6.7 Does The NEAP Have To Be Included In The State's Implementation Plan?

The State, local, or Tribal agency is not required to submit the NEAP as a revision to the SIP for the area. However, if any rules that are currently a part of the SIP are revised as part of the NEAP, those rules must be submitted to EPA as a revision to the SIP13. The State, local, or Tribal air quality agency should make the NEAP available for public review and comment. Preliminary and final plans should be submitted to EPA for review and concurrence, along with the documentation of stakeholder and public participation in the NEAP development process, and public comments on the NEAP and the response of the State, local, Tribal air quality agency. The concurrence process related to the Regional Office review of the NEAP is to assist the State, local, or Tribal air quality agency in identifying, adopting, and implementing appropriate control measures related to the contributing anthropogenic sources related to the event in question. The EPA does not intend to publish notices to approve or disapprove NEAPs. However, the State, local, or Tribal air quality agency may make a decision to submit the NEAP, or the control measures under the NEAP, to EPA to make them federally enforceable. Again, EPA does not require that the NEAP be made federally enforceable, but does require that the appropriate Regional Office provide a concurrence on the NEAP in order for the flagged data to be discounted from regulatory consideration.

6.8 When Must A State Develop A NEAP?

A NEAP must be developed when natural events cause a Particulate Matter NAAQS not to be met. However, since natural events can significantly increase concentrations of Particulate Matter in an area for a few hours, or several days at a time, the State should consider implementing many of the elements of a NEAP in advance of an event ( e. g., public notification, education, and episode response programs) to respond to future natural events and to mitigate the impact on the public.

6.9 How Does The NEAP Apply To Areas Designated As Nonattainment?

The State may request that a nonattainment area for the Particulate Matter NAAQS not be reclassified to a higher classification, when appropriate, if it can be demonstrated that the area would have attained the affected standard by the statutory attainment date but for emissions DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE16 caused by a natural event. Similarly, the State may request redesignation of nonattainment areas to attainment if it can be demonstrated that the area would have met the affected NAAQS for the affected pollutant " but for" the emissions caused a natural event.

Approval of the above requests will be made by EPA on a case by case basis as determined by the adequacy of the information submitted by the State to substantiate its claim. At a minimum, the State must have adopted a NEAP for the area which demonstrates that, " but for" the emissions from the natural event in question the area would have met the NAAQS. In order for the area to be redesignated to attainment the State must also have adopted a SIP for the area and submitted a redesignation request along with a maintenance plan pursuant to section 175A of the Act. In each case, all of the requirements must be met related to redesignation of an area from nonattainment to attainment under section 107( d)( 3)( E) of the CAA.

In order for a Regional Office to approve the redesignation request of a State related to an area affected by a natural event the State must agree to keep the NEAP in place following the redesignation of the area to attainment. As stated previously, a review of the NEAP should be performed by the State and the Regional Office at least once every 3 5 years to determine whether the NEAP is still adequate, or whether there is a need for changes to the provisions of the NEAP in order to make it more effective. If it can be demonstrated by the State, local, or Tribal agency that conditions which warranted the implementation of the NEAP no longer exist after the first 5 year period, the State, local, or Tribal air quality agency may submit a request to the affected Regional Office to discontinue the implementation of the NEAP for the area. The Regional Office should provide an approval or disapproval of the request based upon information submitted by the State, local, or Tribal air quality agency. The approval or non approval of the State, local, or Tribal air quality agency's request to discontinue the NEAP is to be made available for public review by the affected Regional Office.

6.10 Failure To Develop Or Implement A NEAP.

If the State fails to submit an adequate NEAP that includes the components described in this policy for an area that does not meet a Particulate Matter NAAQS, EPA may exercise its discretion to notify the Governor of the State that the area should be designated, or redesignated as the case may be, as nonattainment. The EPA's action, in such instances, would be authorized under section 107 of the Act based on the conclusion that the health of citizens affected by natural events is not being protected by the State. The EPA may also exercise its discretion to call for a SIP revision, also known as a SIP call, to address the issues related to the impacts from the natural events in the area.

In cases where an area has been designated, or redesignated, as nonattainment, or EPA has called for a SIP revision, the State will be required to adopt a federally enforceable control strategy related to sources of Particulate Matter emissions in the affected area. Most likely, the SIP revision or control strategy will include many of the same mitigative measures that could have been included in a NEAP for the area DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE17 6.11 Data Affected By Natural Events Due To Transport From International Sources The States with air quality monitoring sites that have been impacted by emissions from natural events, due to transport from international origins, may flag the data related to these events for discounting from regulatory consideration if adequate and compelling documentation is provided to substantiate the claim. The documentation must show that there is a clear causal relationship between the exceedances or violations measured at the air quality monitoring site in question, and the documentation must substantiate that the emissions were due to emissions from sources of international origin. An example of the types of natural events attributed to international transport which may be considered under this policy are the following: ( 1) fires occurring outside of the borders of the United States, such as forest fires initiated in Mexico, Central America, and Canada, or natural events such as African dust, Asian dust, or glacial dust. Other types of events may be considered on a case by case basis.

As stated previously, in order for the data to be considered for exclusion for regulatory purposes, the reporting air quality agency must flag the data in the AQS database and submit adequate and compelling documentation which shows that the event occurred and that there is a clear causal relationship between the event in question and the exceedance or violation that was measured at the affected monitoring site. Decisions concerning the concurrence or nonconcurrence of data in the AQS database related to emissions from natural events transported for international origins will be made by the appropriate Regional Office, along with consultation from OAQPS, within the time periods provided in this policy for flagging the data and submittal of documentation. ( See section 5 above concerning flagging of data and submittal of documentation.) EPA will be disinclined to grant concurrence on flagged data unless it is determined that sufficient documentation has been submitted related to the event in question, within the time periods provided in this policy.

Section 7 Exceptional Events 7.1 Criteria For Identification Of Exceptional Events As stated previously, for the purpose of this document, certain events are considered to be exceptional for two reasons: ( 1) they are not expected to recur routinely at a given location, or ( 2) they are determined not to be reasonably controllable or unpreventable. The criteria chosen for identifying " exceptional events" in this document was designed to be expansive enough to encompass most good faith claims by State, local, and Tribal air quality agencies related to when data should be considered for special treatment. The flagging of data in the AQS database is the process that a State, local, or Tribal air quality agency uses to indicate that it believes that data has been influenced by an exceptional event, and will later provide documentation that substantiates a claim that the data should be discounted for regulatory purposes. DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE18 As stated previously, in order for data to be discounted by EPA from regulatory consideration, a State must provide the appropriate documentation to show that there is a clear causal relationship between the exceptional event and the exceedance or violation measured at the monitoring site in question. Below are several examples of exceptional events covered by this document. The EPA will consider other types of events on a case by case basis and will provide concurrence related to these events if appropriate documentation is provided to demonstrate that the event occurred and that it caused or significantly contributed to an exceedance or violation at a monitoring site. The EPA will exercise its discretion to deny claims related to data submitted by a State, local, or Tribal air quality agency if it determines through a review of the history of the monitoring site, or the affected area, that the event occurs routinely at the location in question, or is an event that does not meet the criteria of being " not being reasonably controllable" or " unpreventable". Examples of events that will be covered under this policy include such events as: ( 2) chemical spills, ( 3) Industrial accidents, ( 4) Clean ups after major disasters, and ( 5) Infrequent Large Gatherings.

The guidance concerning exceptional events in this document provides general definitions and examples for these types of events and provides general criteria related to the flagging of the events in the AQS database. The definitions and examples identified as exceptional events in this document should only be considered as a guide in making decisions related to exceptional events and should not replace reasonable judgement on the part of the affected Regional Office, State, local, or Tribal air quality agency defining and identifying exceptional events for the purpose of flagging data..

In cases where it is foreseeable that human activity related to a specific exceptional event may have potential impact on the public, the affected State, local, or Tribal air quality agency will be expected to have implemented appropriate pre emptive control measures to mitigate the impact of the activity on the public. In cases where the State, local, or Tribal air quality agency has taken action to develop and implement a control plan to mitigate the impact of these types of events, or an Exceptional Event Mitigation Action Plan ( EEMAP), EPA will take this information into consideration in making its decisions concerning the concurrence related to these types of data flags in the AQS database. With these limitations in mind the following are some general definitions related to exceptional events covered by this guidance document.

7.2 Chemical Spills And Industrial Accidents Emissions that result from accidents such as fire explosions, power outages, train derailments, vehicular accidents, or combinations of these may be flagged as an exceptional event. The spill or accident must, of course, not be a routine occurrence. Any of these situations that do occur routinely should be critically evaluated and stopped. Data from States that can be unequivocally related to a non routine accident or spill may be flagged. DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE19 7.3 Infrequent Large Gatherings An infrequent large gathering is a gathering of more than 10,000 people ( 5000 cars) at any one time and at a single location. Unusual traffic congestion must be associated with the event. A large gathering in and of itself without the associated traffic congestion would not qualify as an unusual event for the purpose of flagging. The event would also be expected to occur less than once per year, and the event should be limited to sites classified as micro or middle scale with respect to the gathering. The EPA will also consider the discounting of data related to celebratory events in which emissions from fireworks either cause or significantly contributes to exceedances or violations of the NAAQS. These events may only be discounted where it has been determined by the affected Regional Office that they events are not routine in terms of occurrence ( i. e., they only occur once per year) and precautions have been taken by the appropriate air quality agency to mitigate the influence of the event on public health. Prior to the types of event described in this section, all reasonable available control measures must be used, and documented, before the data can be flagged for exclusion from regulatory consideration related to the site.

7.4 Clean Up Activities After A Major Disaster For the purpose of flagging, major disasters are to be considered as serious public misfortunes for which State and Federal relief has been granted. Particulate Matter data affected by, and collected during, or for a reasonable period after, the clean up activities following a major disaster may be flagged in order for the event to be excluded from regulatory consideration.

7.5 Development Of An Exceptional Event Mitigation Action Plan ( EEMAP)

The State, local, or Tribal agency should develop an EEMAP in conjunction with the affected stakeholders in the area. When the State, local, or Tribal agency develops an EEMAP related to an exceptional event the plan should include input from affected stakeholders related to the event. The plan should include documented agreements among the stakeholders delineating planned actions, the implementation schedule, and the parties responsible for carrying out those actions.

7.6 Response To NAAQS Violations Due To Exceptional Events.

If an area fails to meet a NAAQS because one or more Particulate Matter values has been affected by an exceptional event, the State is required to develop an EEMAP to address future events within 18 months of the NAAQS violation. A EEMAP should:

1. Establish public notification and education programs. Such programs may be designed to educate the public about the short term and long term harmful effects that high concentrations of Particulate Matter may have on public health and inform the public DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE20 that: ( a) certain types of exceptional events affect the air quality of the area periodically, ( b) an exceptional event is imminent, and ( c) specific actions are being taken to minimize the public health impacts of the event.

2. Minimize public exposure to high concentrations of Particulate Matter due to future exceptional events. Programs to minimize public exposure should: ( a) identify the people most at risk, ( b) notify the at risk population that an exceptional event is imminent or currently taking place, ( c) suggest actions to be taken by the public to minimize their exposure to high concentrations of Particulate Matter, and ( d) suggest precautions that should be taken if exposure cannot be avoided.

3. Abate or minimize appropriate contributing controllable sources.

7.7 Failure To Develop Or Implement An EEMAP.

If the State fails to submit an adequate EEMAP that includes the components described in this policy for an area that does not meet a Particulate Matter NAAQS, EPA may exercise its discretion to notify the Governor of the State that the area should be designated, or redesignated as the case may be, as nonattainment. The EPA's action, in such instances, would be authorized under section 107 of the Act based on the conclusion that the health of citizens affected by natural events is not being protected by the State. The EPA may also exercise its discretion to call for a SIP revision, or SIP call, to address the issues related to the impacts from the natural events in the area.

Section 8 Stagnation and Inversion Events 8.1 Stagnation/ Inversions Stagnation and inversions are frequent climatological occurrences that must be considered in evaluating whether a control program is adequate to attain and maintain the NAAQS. An inversion is said to occur at a point, or through a layer, where temperature increases with increasing height. Surface based inversions are those that extend vertically from the surface to some altitude aloft. Studies have found that surface based inversions generally occur about 32 percent of the time. They are usually short lived and disperse shortly after sunrise. Because inversions are expected to occur frequently and are part of weather patterns, they are not considered exceptional events for the purpose of flagging data for exclusion. DRAFT  DO NOT QUOTE or CITE21 Stagnation episodes are periods of four or more days with surface wind speeds of generally 4 m/ sec or less and no precipitation or frontal passage. In some parts of the country stagnation conditions usually persist for an extended period of time, and they can affect an entire air basin; therefore, they are not generally considered exceptional for the purpose of flagging data for exclusion.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 139 (Friday, July 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47138-47139]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15500]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL OP-OFA-078]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or https://www.epa.gov/nepa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)
Filed July 10, 2023 10 a.m. EST Through July 17, 2023 10 a.m. EST
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxapps.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-II/public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20230086, Revised Draft, USACE, LA, St. Tammany Parish,
Louisiana Feasibility Study, Comment Period Ends: 09/06/2023, Contact:
Sandra Stiles<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20230087, Final, BOEM, RI, Revolution Wind Farm and Revolution
Wind Export Cable Final Environmental Impact Statement, Review Period
Ends: 08/21/2023, Contact: Jessica Stromberg<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20230088, Final, BIA, ID, Nez Perce Tribe Integrated Resource
Management Plan, Review Period Ends: 08/21/2023, Contact: Tobiah
Mogavero<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 17, 2023.
Cindy S. Barger,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2023-15500 Filed 7-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 1, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 190)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 60669-60671]
[DOCID:fr01oc10-24]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0954; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-078-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type
Certificate Previously Held by Raytheon Aircraft Company; Beech
Aircraft Corporation) Model 400A and 400T Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Model 400A, and 400T airplanes. This proposed AD would require
a detailed inspection for proper sealant of the left and right pylon
firewall structures, and corrective actions if necessary. This proposed
AD results from reports of missing sealant on the left and right pylon
firewall structures. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct
missing sealant on the left and right pylon firewall structures, which,
in the event of an engine fire, could result in flames penetrating the
seams in the firewall between the engine and the aft fuselage, and a
subsequent uncontrolled fire in the aft fuselage.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 15,
2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Hawker Beechcraft Corporation, Department 62, P.O. Box 85, Wichita,
Kansas 67201-0085; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/

service_support/pubs. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Teplik, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Propulsion Branch, ACE-116W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent
Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (316)
946-4107.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-0954;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-078-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We have received reports of missing sealant on the left and right
pylon firewall structures. The sealant may not have been applied on the
firewall at the seams in production. Pylon firewall structures that do
not have this sealant do not meet the applicable design intent. In the
event of an engine fire, flames could penetrate the seams in the
firewall between the engine and the aft fuselage. Missing or inadequate
sealant, if not corrected, combined with the event of an engine fire
could result in an uncontrolled fire in the aft fuselage.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Hawker Beechcraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB
54-3946, Revision 2, dated February 2010. This service bulletin
describes procedures for doing an inspection of the left and right
pylon for coverage of firewall sealant on the seams, and corrective
actions. While Hawker Beechcraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 54-3946,
Revision 1, dated May 2009, provides the procedures for doing the
inspection of the left and right pylon for coverage of firewall sealant
on the seams and applying sealant, it does not specify the dimensions
of the sealant. Corrective actions include cleaning, sealing, or
recoating affected areas; and recoating sealant. Figure 4 of Hawker
Beechcraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 54-3946, Revision 2, dated
February 2010, contains the specifications of the sealant depth.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of these same type
designs. This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions
specified in the service information described previously, except as
discussed under ``Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service
Information.''

Differences Between the Proposed AD and Service Information

    Hawker Beechcraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 54-3946, Revision
2, dated February 2010, specifies a compliance time of the next
scheduled inspection, but no later than 12 months after the date of the
service bulletin revision. This proposed AD would require a compliance
time of within 200 flight hours or within 12 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first. The service bulletin also does
not specify what type of inspection to perform. This AD requires that a
detailed inspection be performed.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 165 airplanes of
U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour
per product to comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is
$85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this
proposed AD to the U.S. operators to be $14,025, or $85 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866,
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the 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.
    You can find our regulatory evaluation and the estimated costs of
compliance in the AD Docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 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. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type Certificate Previously Held by
Raytheon Aircraft Company; Beech Aircraft Corporation): Docket No.
FAA-2010-0954; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-078-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by November 15, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (Type
Certificate previously held by Raytheon Aircraft Company; Beech
Aircraft Corporation), certificated in any category; as identified
in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Model 400A airplanes having serial numbers RK-337 through
RK-484, RK-486 through RK-570 inclusive, RK-572, RK-573, and RK-575
through RK-577 inclusive.
    (2) Model 400T airplane having serial number TX-13.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 54:
Nacelles/Pylons.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from reports of missing sealant on the left
and right pylon firewall structures. The Federal Aviation
Administration is issuing this AD to detect and correct missing
sealant on the left and right pylon firewall structures, which, in
the event of an engine fire, could result in flames penetrating the
seams in the firewall between the engine and the aft fuselage, and a
subsequent uncontrolled fire in the aft fuselage.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Inspection and Corrective Action

    (g) Within 200 flight hours or 12 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first: Do a detailed inspection
for appropriate coverage of firewall sealant of the left and right
pylon firewall structure, as specified in the figures of Hawker
Beechcraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 54-3946, Revision 2, dated
February 2010, and all applicable corrective actions; in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Hawker Beechcraft Mandatory
Service Bulletin SB 54-3946, Revision 2, dated February 2010. Do all
applicable corrective actions before further flight.

    Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is:
``An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or
assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available
lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as
mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning
and elaborate procedures may be required.''

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (h)(1) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
ATTN: Thomas Teplik, Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Propulsion
Branch, ACE-116W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas
67209; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 23, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-24714 Filed 9-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: April 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 81)]
[Notices]
[Page 22459-22460]
[DOCID:fr25ap08-142]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2007-0042; Notice 2]

General Motors Corporation, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

    General Motors Corporation (GM) has determined that certain model
year 2005, 2006 and 2007 Cadillac STS passenger cars equipped with
sunroofs do not fully comply with paragraph S4(e) of 49 CFR 571.118,
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 118, Power-Operated
Window, Partition, and Roof Panel Systems. On October 3, 2007, GM filed
an appropriate report pursuant to 49 CFR part 573, Defect and
Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports identifying approximately
60,042 model year 2005, 2006 and 2007 Cadillac STS passenger cars that
do not comply with the paragraph of FMVSS No. 118 cited above.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and the rule
implementing those provisions at 49 CFR Part 556, GM has petitioned for
an exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C.
Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to
motor vehicle safety. Notice of receipt of the petition was published,
with a 30-day public comment period, on December 10, 2007 in the
Federal Register (72 FR 69727). No comments were received. To view the
petition and all supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then
follow the online search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-
2007-0042.''
    For further information on this decision, contact Mr. Stuart
Seigel, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    GM certified these vehicles to paragraph S4(e) of 49 CFR 571.118,
which requires in pertinent part:

    S4. Operating requirements. * * * power operated window,
partition, or roof panel systems may be closed only in the following
circumstances: * * *
    (e) During the interval between the time the locking device
which controls the activation of the vehicle's engine is turned off
and the opening of either of a two-door vehicle's doors or, in the
case of a vehicle with more than two doors, the opening of either of
its front doors;

    GM explains that for 60 seconds after the vehicles are started, if
the engine is turned off and a front door is opened, the sunroof module
software allows the sunroof to be closed if someone in the vehicle
activates the control switch. If more than 60 seconds elapses from the
starting of the vehicle, this condition will not occur.
    GM stated that it is not aware of any incidents or injury related
to the subject condition.
    GM included an analysis of the risk associated with the subject
condition and a detailed explanation of the reasons why it believes the
noncompliance to be inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.
    In summary, GM states that for all of the subject vehicles:
     The subject condition affects only the sunroof, not the
power windows.
     The subject condition requires multiple actions that must
occur within a 60 second time period. First, the following sequence of
actions must occur: driver starts engine, driver turns off engine, and
driver or front passenger opens a front door. After this sequence of
actions and still within the 60 second time frame, occupants must take
additional actions: Push the sunroof close switch and position an
occupant to create the risk of sunroof entrapment. All of these actions
must occur within one 60 second time frame.
     If the sunroof switch is pushed steadily and then
released, the sunroof promptly stops moving.
     The sunroof incorporates an auto-reverse system. This
system will activate whenever the sunroof is closing in the express
close mode. Therefore, sunroof entrapment requires the completion of
the initial sequence of engine start/engine stop/front door open
actions, and also requires an occupant to press and hold the sunroof
closure switch and position an occupant within the sunroof--all within
the 60 second window and in such a manner that the auto-reverse is not
effective in preventing sunroof entrapment.
     The Agency has granted similar petitions in the past.
     GM is not aware of any injures or incidents related to the
subject condition.
    GM states that it believes that because the noncompliance is
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety that no further corrective
action is warranted. GM has also informed NHTSA that it has corrected
the problem that caused these errors so that they will not be repeated
in future production.

NHTSA Decision

    The following explains our rationale.
    The purpose of paragraph S4 of FMVSS No. 118 is to minimize the
likelihood of death or injury to occupants from accidental operation of
power windows, partitions, and roof panels. We believe that this
noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for a number
of reasons. It is very unlikely that the entire sequence of events--
starting the engine, turning the engine off, opening a front door, a
person becoming positioned in the sunroof opening, and pushing the
sunroof close button--will occur in less than 60 seconds. We also
believe that the risk exposure time is likely further reduced as the
sunroof, normally closed at the time of engine start, would have to
first be opened then closed, with the opening time subtracted from the
60 second interval.
    The noncompliant situation does not involve power windows, where
entrapment is rare but a realistic possibility. Power window openings
are physically more accessible to occupants than the sunroof opening
and thus present a higher risk of entrapment to persons in the vehicle,
especially unattended occupants (normally children).
    The subject vehicle sunroof can be closed either by continuous
actuation of the sunroof switch, or by a momentary touch and release of
the same switch which initiates an express-close mode. In the first
mode, the sunroof ceases movement upon release of the switch. This
allows immediate operator sunroof closure control minimizing the
entrapment risk. During the express-close mode, the vehicle
incorporates an auto-reverse feature that is designed to reverse
sunroof motion before it can exert a force of 100N (22.5lbf.) or more
on a foreign object or person. We believe this added feature will
further minimize the risk of entrapment to an occupant (normally a
child).
    Lastly, GM indicates that it is not aware of any injuries, owner
complaints

or field reports related to this noncompliance.
    Based on the above, NHTSA has decided that GM has met its burden of
persuasion that the sunroof noncompliance described is inconsequential
to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, GM's petition is granted and the
petitioner is exempted from the obligation of providing notification
of, and a remedy for, the noncompliances under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and
30120.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120; delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: April 18, 2008.
Daniel C. Smith,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
 [FR Doc. E8-8989 Filed 4-24-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P