[Federal Register: June 22, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 120)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 35813-35816]
[DOCID:fr22jn06-18]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-R04-SFUND-2006-0228; FRL-8188-1]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final notice of deletion of Davie Landfill Superfund
Site from the National Priorities list.

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

SUMMARY: EPA Region 4 is publishing a direct final notice of deletion
of the Davie Landfill, Superfund Site (Site), located in Davie,
Florida, from the National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL, promulgated
pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is
appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which is the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct final notice
of deletion is being published by EPA with the concurrence of the State
of Florida, through the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP) because EPA has determined that all appropriate response actions
under CERCLA have been completed and, therefore, further remedial
action pursuant to CERCLA is not appropriate.

DATES: This direct final notice is effective August 21, 2006 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by July 24, 2006.
If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final notice in the Federal Register and inform the public
that the notice will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by EPA-R04-SFUND-2006-0228,
by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-SFUND-2006-0228'', Superfund Remedial Section C,
Superfund Remedial & Technical Services Branch, Waste Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Scott M. Martin, Remedial Project
Manager, Superfund Remedial Section C, Superfund Remedial & Technical
Services Branch, Waste Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional
Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding
Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to EPA-R04-SFUND-2006-0228.
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov
, including any personal information provided,

unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://www.regulations.gov

or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous

access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov
, your e-mail address will be automatically captured

and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form.

Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Superfund Remedial

Section C, Superfund Remedial & Technical Services Branch, Waste
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if
at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to
4:30 excluding legal holidays.
    Comprehensive information on this Site is available through the
Region 4 public docket, which is available for viewing at the Davie
Landfill Site information repositories at two locations. Locations,
contacts, phone numbers and viewing hours are:
    Davie Landfill Site Repository, Broward County Main Public Library,
100 S. Andrews Ave., Level 5, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33301.
    U.S. EPA Record Center, attn: Ms. Debbie Jourdan, Atlanta Federal
Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960, Phone:
(404) 562-8862, Hours 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday by
appointment only.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott M. Martin, Remedial Project
Manager, Superfund Remedial Section C, Superfund Remedial & Technical
Services Branch, Waste Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Mr. Martin can also
be reached via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
V. Deletion Action

I. Introduction

    EPA Region 4 is publishing this direct final notice of deletion of
the Davie Landfill Superfund Site from the NPL.
    The EPA identifies Sites that appear to present a significant risk
to public health or the environment and maintains the NPL as the list
of those Sites. As described in the Section 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP,
Sites deleted from the NPL remain eligible for remedial actions if
conditions at a deleted Site warrant such action.
    Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting
Sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that EPA is using
for this action. Section IV discusses the Davie Landfill Superfund Site
and demonstrates how it meets the deletion criteria. Section V
discusses EPA's action to delete the Site from the NPL unless adverse
comments are received during the public comment period.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

    Section 300.425(e) of the NCP provides that releases may be deleted
from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In making a
determination to delete a Site from the NPL, EPA shall consider, in
consultation with the State, whether any of the following criteria have
been met:
    i. Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all
appropriate response actions required;
    ii. All appropriate Fund-financed (Hazardous Substance Superfund)
response under CERCLA has been implemented, and no further response
action by responsible parties is appropriate; or
    iii. The remedial investigation has shown that the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the environment and, therefore,
the taking of remedial measures is not appropriate.
    Even if a Site is deleted from the NPL, where hazardous substances,
pollutants, or contaminants remain at the deleted Site above levels
that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, CERCLA section
121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9621(c) requires that a subsequent review of the Site
be conducted at least every five years after the initiation of the
remedial action at the deleted Site to ensure that the action remains
protective of public health and the environment. If new information
becomes available which indicates a need for further action, EPA may
initiate remedial actions. Whenever there is a significant release from
a Site deleted from the NPL, the deleted Site may be restored to the
NPL without application of the hazard ranking system.

III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures apply to deletion of the Site:
    (1) The EPA consulted with the State of Florida on the deletion of
the Site from the NPL prior to developing this direct final notice of
deletion.
    (2) Florida concurred with deletion of the Site from the NPL.
    (3) Concurrently with the publication of this direct final notice
of deletion, a notice of the availability of the parallel notice of
intent to delete published today in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of
the Federal Register is being published in a major local newspaper of
general circulation at or near the Site and is being distributed to
appropriate federal, state, and local government officials and other
interested parties; the newspaper notice announces the 30-day public
comment period concerning the notice of intent to delete the Site from
the NPL.
    (4) The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the deletion in
the Site information repositories identified above.
    (5) If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public
comment period on this document, EPA will publish a timely notice of
withdrawal of this direct final notice of deletion before its effective
date and will prepare a response to comments and continue with the
deletion process on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the
comments already received.
    Deletion of a Site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a Site from
the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement
actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for
informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion of a Site from the
NPL does not preclude eligibility for future response actions, should
future conditions warrant such actions.

IV. Basis for Site Deletion

    The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the
Site from the NPL:

Site Location

    Davie Landfill Superfund Site, 4001 SW. 142nd Avenue, Broward
County, Davie, Florida 33314. EPA ID: FLD980602288.

Site History

    The Davie Landfill Site, located at 4001 SW. 142nd Avenue in Davie,
Florida, is a 209 acre parcel of land that includes a 48 acre Class I
landfill (north mound) and a 68 acre Class III landfill (south mound).
The Site is situated in an area that previously has been mainly rural
and agricultural but is quickly being developed into a residential
area. The landfill began operation in 1964 with the startup of the
county's garbage incinerator. Ash from the incinerator, construction
debris, and demolition debris, were placed in the landfill. In 1975,
the incinerator was closed because its emissions failed to meet new air
regulations. At that time, a sanitary landfill was constructed for
disposal of municipal solid waste. The sanitary landfill also accepted
construction

debris, tires, and other wastes. Between 1971 and 1981, a basin area at
the landfill was used for the disposal of grease trap material, septic
tank sludge and treated municipal sludge. The Site was proposed for the
NPL on December 30, 1982. A portion of the Site (approximately 160
acres) was converted to a Broward County regional park, known as Vista
View Park, which opened to the public on July 12, 2003.

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

Operable Unit (OU) 1
    The initial Remedial Investigation (RI) was conducted between
January 1983 and September 1985, and focused mainly on the sludge
disposal area. The RI report confirmed that cyanide and sulfide were
present in the sludge in the basin area. All landfill activities ceased
in December 1987, and Broward County began the closeout of the
landfill. EPA then released a Feasibility Study (FS) which concluded
that the Site could pose a potential health threat to the public
through dermal contact with the contaminated soil in the sludge
disposal area. No activities using removal authority were conducted at
this Site.
Operable Unit 2
    In 1988, the Broward County Public Health Unit found vinyl chloride
contamination in private wells south of the Site. In the early 1990's,
further sampling by Broward County confirmed that vinyl chloride and
antimony had contaminated the groundwater in the area. Therefore,
another RI was conducted at the Site between March 1992 and August
1994. Antimony and vinyl chloride were detected at levels above their
respective drinking water standards. The final RI report summarized all
Site analyses results. EPA released an FS which concluded that the Site
could pose a potential health threat to the public through ingestion of
groundwater contaminated with antimony and vinyl chloride. The FS
provided a detailed analysis of monitored natural attenuation and pump
and treat remedial alternatives.

Record of Decision Findings

Operable Unit 1
    On September 30, 1985, EPA issued a Record of Decision (ROD) which
selected excavation of all contaminated soil in the sludge disposal
area, on-Site treatment of the contaminated soil via stabilization, and
then disposal of the stabilized soil in Cell Number 14 of the landfill.
Operable Unit 2
    On August 11, 1994, EPA issued a ROD which selected monitored
natural attenuation to address the antimony and vinyl chloride
contamination in the groundwater. In addition, the ROD required the
monitoring of area residential wells to determine the impact of Site
related groundwater contamination and the extension of public water
supply connections to residents whose private wells had been impacted.
The State of Florida's drinking water standards for antimony and vinyl
chloride were selected as the cleanup standards.

Response Actions

Operable Unit 1
    On June 30, 1988, a Cooperative Agreement was awarded to the
Broward County Board of Commissioners for partial funding of the
remediation of the sludge lagoon portion of the Site. Pursuant to the
ROD and the Cooperative Agreement, Broward County performed the
remediation of the sludge lagoon, which was completed in July 1989.
    The excavation, dewatering and stabilization of the lagoon sludge
began on April 15, 1989. Dry and wet sludge materials were mixed to
create a uniform mixture for stabilization. Type I Portland cement was
then added to the mixture, as necessary, to stabilize the material and
to remove any remaining free moisture. The stabilized material was
loaded onto dump trucks and hauled to Cell Number 14 of the sanitary
landfill for disposal. A total of 82,158 cubic yards of sludge were
excavated, stabilized and disposed. Sludge was also encountered and
removed from the eastern slope of the trash landfill and the dike areas
and concrete off-loading ramp associated with the sludge lagoon. Sludge
removal and stabilization activities were completed in May 1989.
    Excavation of unsuitable material around the sludge lagoon was
performed concurrently with the sludge excavation activities. These
materials included trash, construction materials and other debris used
in the construction of the dike surrounding the sludge lagoon. A total
of 57,626 cubic yards of unsuitable material were excavated from the
area. These materials were disposed of in either Cell Number 14 or the
sanitary landfill or the trash landfill, as required. Excavation of the
unsuitable material was completed in July 1989.
    Final grading of the sludge lagoon occurred in June 1989. This
included the creation of a water channel connecting the newly excavated
nature pond (former sludge lagoon) and Borrow Pit Number 2. The nature
pond was created during the excavation and removal of the foundation
material. Based on the satisfactory analytical results of compoSite
surface water samples collected from the newly constructed nature pond,
excavation of the connecting channel between the new nature pond and
Borrow Pit Number 2 was completed in July 1989.
    Construction of the final cover for Cell Number 14 of the sanitary
landfill began on July 25, 1989, and was completed on August 8, 1989. A
total of 31,969 tons of limerock were used as landfill cover material.
Two lifts of material, 1-foot thick, were spread and compacted to an
in-place density of at least 98%. The final cover was sloped at a 2%
grade towards the southwest corner of the sanitary landfill.
Operable Unit 2
    In 1988, Broward County extended public water lines to the area of
Sunshine Ranches between Griffin Road and Palomino Drive (north and
south boundaries) and between Volunteer Road and Hancock Road (west and
east boundaries). In 1994, the water line was extended 300 feet east of
Hancock Road on East Palomino Drive.
    EPA determined that the groundwater sampling data collected as part
of the FDEP landfill closure permit would provide all information
necessary to monitor the progress of natural attenuation. This required
the semiannual monitoring of seven groundwater monitoring well
clusters. Therefore, because execution of the remedial design for
groundwater did not require any major construction activities, the
remedial action at the Site was determined to be operational and
functional on October 18, 1995.

Cleanup Standards

Operable Unit 1
    As part of the 1985 ROD, residual soil cleanup goals were
established for lead, chromium, cadmium, arsenic and mercury. In May
1989, thirty-nine foundation material samples from seven sampling Sites
were obtained and submitted for analysis to determine the effectiveness
of the sludge lagoon cleanup activities. The result of the analysis
indicated that all but two sample locations revealed concentrations
below the soil cleanup goals. The two said sample locations revealed
marginal exceedances of the soil cleanup goals for arsenic. The areas
surrounding these sampling locations were further excavated. Surface
scraping of the lagoon area was performed along

with the excavation of the foundation materials. A total of 23,400
cubic yards of material were excavated and disposed of in Cell Number
14 of the sanitary landfill. These activities were completed in June
1989.
Operable Unit 2
    The natural attenuation monitoring plan required the semiannual
monitoring of seven groundwater monitoring well clusters. The ROD
requires one year of meeting cleanup standards to demonstrate
completion. From September 2000 until September 2003, groundwater data
indicated that groundwater cleanup standards for vinyl chloride and
antimony had been achieved.

Operation and Maintenance

    Broward County will conduct all the Operation and Maintenance (O&M)
activities at the Site. Since the Site is an officially closed
landfill, the operation and maintenance requirements of the Post-
Closure landfill closure permit will require the continued monitoring
of the seven groundwater monitoring well clusters, maintenance of the
landfill cover, stormwater/surface water management, biweekly
inspection of the leachate liner, and maintenance of the sanitary
landfill gas collection and control system. Additionally, the Site has
been converted into a Broward County park and will be maintained
accordingly. The current estimated annual operations and maintenance
cost is $250,000.

Five-Year Review

    This Site meets all the Site completion requirements as specified
in Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) Directive
9320.2-09-A-P, Close Out Procedures for National Priorities List Sites.
Specifically, confirmatory sampling verifies that the Site has achieved
the ROD cleanup standards specified in both the OU1 and OU2 RODs, and
that all cleanup actions specified in the ROD have been implemented.
The only remaining activity to be performed is O&M that Broward County
will conduct.
    Because hazardous materials remain at the Site inside the landfill
above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure,
Section 121 of CERCLA requires ongoing statutory review to be conducted
no less than every five years from the start of remedial actions. The
first five-year review was conducted in March 1994, and the second was
conducted in May 2000. These reviews concluded that the selected remedy
remains protective of human health and the environment.

Community Involvement

    Public participation activities have been satisfied as required in
CERCLA section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k), and CERCLA section 117, 42
U.S.C. 9617. Documents in the deletion docket which EPA relied on for
recommendation of the deletion from the NPL are available to the public
in the information repositories.
    All basic requirements for public participation under CERCLA were
met in both remedy selection processes. Because the Site is located in
a residential area, community relations activities were focused on
communication between the residents in the affected community and the
government agencies. Special attention was directed toward keeping the
community informed of all study results. Meetings were held with the
Town of Davie officials and availability sessions were held with the
community. Because the area is rapidly changing from small horse farms
and agricultural to more high density residential, EPA continues to
provide active community relations by publishing fact sheets and
answering calls and e-mails from people who are considering purchasing
a new home in the area.

V. Deletion Action

    The EPA, with concurrence of the State of Florida, has determined
that all appropriate responses under CERCLA have been completed, and
that no further response actions, under CERCLA, other than O&M and
five-year reviews, are necessary. Therefore, EPA is deleting the Site
from the NPL.
    Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and
routine, EPA is taking it without prior publication. This action will
be effective August 21, 2006 unless EPA receives adverse comments by
July 24, 2006. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day
public comment period, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this
direct final notice of deletion before the effective date of the
deletion and it will not take effect and, EPA will prepare a response
to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the
notice of intent to delete and the comments already received. There
will be no additional opportunity to comment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous waste, Hazardous
substances, Superfund, Water pollution control, Water supply.

    Dated: June 8, 2006.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

0
40 CFR part 300 is amended as follows:

PART 300--[AMENDED]

0
1. 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]

0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing the Site
Davie Landfill, Davie, Florida.

[FR Doc. 06-5595 Filed 6-21-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 115 (Wednesday, June 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34975-34976]
[FR Doc No: 2011-14755]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 [Project No. 14102-000]

 U.S. Farmers, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Competing Applications

    On February 22, 2011, U.S. Farmers, LLC filed an application for a
preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act
(FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the

Deep Creek Hydroelectric Project to be located on Deep Creek, Oxbow
Creek, and Snake River in Adams County, Idaho. The sole purpose of a
preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority
to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary
permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-
disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by
others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project will consist of the following; (1) a 20-foot-
wide, 6-feet-high concrete diversion on Deep Creek; (2) a 20-foot-wide,
6-feet-high concrete diversion on Oxbow Creek; (3) a 10,000-foot-long,
2-foot-diameter steel penstock; (4) a powerhouse situated at the
confluence of Deep Creek and the Snake River containing one Pelton-type
impulse turbine at 3-megawatts; (5) a 500-foot-long, 12.5-kilovolt-
ampere transmission line connecting to the Idaho Power Company's Hell
Canyon Dam sub-station at the Hells Canyon Dam; (6) a 10,000-foot-long
gravel road. The estimated annual generation of the project would be 13
gigawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. John J. Straubhar, P.O. Box 5071, Twinfalls,
ID 83303; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Ian Smith; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14102-000) in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: June 8, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-14755 Filed 6-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 209 (Tuesday, October 31, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74562-74563]
[FR Doc No: 2023-24013]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2010-0036]

Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority's Request To
Amend Its Positive Train Control System

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of availability and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This document provides the public with notice that, on October
20, 2023, the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority
(SEPTA) submitted a request for amendment (RFA) to its FRA-certified
positive train control (PTC) system. FRA is publishing this notice and
inviting public comment on the railroad's RFA to its PTC system.

DATES: FRA will consider comments received by November 20, 2023. FRA
may consider comments received after that date to the extent
practicable and without delaying implementation of valuable or
necessary modifications to a PTC system.

ADDRESSES:
    Comments: Comments may be submitted by going to https://www.regulations.gov and following the online instructions for
submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and the
applicable docket number. The relevant PTC docket number for this host
railroad is Docket No. FRA-2010-0036. For convenience, all active PTC
dockets are hyperlinked on FRA's website at https://railroads.dot.gov/research-development/program-areas/train-control/ptc/railroads-ptc-dockets. All comments received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov; this includes any personal information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gabe Neal, Staff Director, Signal,
Train Control, and Crossings Division, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In general, title 49 United States Code
(U.S.C.) section 20157(h) requires FRA to certify that a host
railroad's PTC system complies with title 49 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part 236, subpart I, before the technology may be
operated in revenue service. Before making certain changes to an FRA-
certified PTC system or the associated FRA-approved PTC Safety Plan
(PTCSP), a host railroad

must submit, and obtain FRA's approval of, an RFA to its PTC system or
PTCSP under 49 CFR 236.1021.
    Under 49 CFR 236.1021(e), FRA's regulations provide that FRA will
publish a notice in the Federal Register and invite public comment in
accordance with 49 CFR part 211, if an RFA includes a request for
approval of a material modification of a signal or train control
system. Accordingly, this notice informs the public that, on October
20, 2023, SEPTA submitted an RFA to its PTCSP for its Interoperable
Electronic Train Management System (I-ETMS), which seeks FRA's approval
for a two- to three-hour outage to support SEPTA's PTC Back Office
Subsystem upgrade. That RFA is available in Docket No. FRA-2010-0036.
Interested parties are invited to comment on SEPTA's RFA by submitting
written comments or data. During FRA's review of this railroad's RFA,
FRA will consider any comments or data submitted within the timeline
specified in this notice and to the extent practicable, without
delaying implementation of valuable or necessary modifications to a PTC
system. See 49 CFR 236.1021; see also 49 CFR 236.1011(e). Under 49 CFR
236.1021, FRA maintains the authority to approve, approve with
conditions, or deny a railroad's RFA at FRA's sole discretion.

Privacy Act Notice

    In accordance with 49 CFR 211.3, FRA solicits comments from the
public to better inform its decisions. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to https://www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of
records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See https://www.regulations.gov/privacy-notice for the privacy notice of regulations.gov. To facilitate
comment tracking, we encourage commenters to provide their name, or the
name of their organization; however, submission of names is completely
optional. If you wish to provide comments containing proprietary or
confidential information, please contact FRA for alternate submission
instructions.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Carolyn R. Hayward-Williams,
Director, Office of Railroad Systems and Technology.
[FR Doc. 2023-24013 Filed 10-30-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73081-73083]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28809]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-D-1814]

Bacterial Detection Testing by Blood Collection Establishments
and Transfusion Services To Enhance the Safety and Availability of
Platelets for Transfusion; Draft Guidance for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of a draft document entitled ``Bacterial Detection Testing
by Blood Collection Establishments and Transfusion Services to Enhance
the Safety and Availability of Platelets for Transfusion'' dated
December 2014. The draft guidance document provides blood collection
establishments and transfusion services with recommendations for
initial testing (primary testing) for bacterial contamination of
platelets intended for transfusion, and provides additional
considerations for blood collection establishments and transfusion
services for subsequent retesting (secondary testing) of platelets
prior to transfusion. The recommendations for primary testing of
platelets and the additional considerations for secondary testing of
platelets described in this guidance are expected to enhance the
detection of bacteria in platelet products and thus enhance transfusion
safety. The draft guidance, when finalized, is intended to supersede
the recommendation in section VII.A.2, in regard to bacterial
contamination testing in the document entitled ``Guidance for Industry
and FDA Review Staff: Collection of Platelets by Automated Methods''
dated December 2007.

DATES: Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this
draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the
guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by March 9, 2015. Submit either electronic or written comments
on the collection of information by February 9, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single copies of the draft
guidance to the Office of Communication, Outreach and Development,
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist
the office in processing your requests. The draft guidance may also be
obtained by mail by calling CBER at 1-800-835-4709 or<PHONE_NUMBER>. See
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the draft
guidance document.
    Submit electronic comments on the draft guidance and information
collection to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to
the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonathan McKnight, Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903
New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,
240-402-7911.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft document entitled
``Bacterial Detection Testing by Blood Collection Establishments and
Transfusion Services to Enhance the Safety and Availability of
Platelets for Transfusion'' dated December 2014. The draft guidance
document provides blood collection establishments and transfusion
services with recommendations for primary testing for bacterial
contamination of platelets intended for transfusion and additional
considerations for blood collection establishments and transfusion
services for secondary testing of platelets prior to transfusion. FDA
also provides recommendations to licensed blood establishments for
submitting Biologics License Application supplements to include
bacterial testing of platelet components. Furthermore, the guidance
informs transfusion services that are currently exempt from
registration and blood product listing that if they choose to perform
secondary testing of platelets to extend the dating period, should this
option become available, they must register with FDA and list the blood
products they manufacture.
    The draft guidance addresses all platelet products, including
platelets manufactured from Whole Blood (Whole Blood Derived (WBD)
platelets), platelets collected by automated methods from a single
donor (apheresis platelets), pooled platelets, and platelets stored in
additive solutions. The recommendations for primary testing of
platelets and the additional considerations for secondary testing of
platelets described in this guidance are expected to enhance the
detection of bacteria in platelet products and thus enhance transfusion
safety. The draft guidance, when finalized, is intended to supersede
the recommendation in section VII.A.2, in regard to bacterial
contamination testing in the document entitled ``Guidance for Industry
and FDA Review Staff: Collection of Platelets by Automated Methods''
dated December 2007.
    Platelets are associated with a higher risk of sepsis and are
related to more fatalities than any other transfusable blood component.
The risk of bacterial contamination of platelets stands out as a
leading risk of infection from blood transfusion. This risk has
persisted despite numerous interventions including the introduction, in
the last decade, of analytically sensitive culture-based bacterial
detection methods, which are widely used to test platelets prior to
their release from blood collection establishments to transfusion
services.
    The draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent FDA's current thinking on this topic. It does
not create or confer any rights for or on any person and does not
operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative approach may be used
if such approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes
and regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA) (44 U.S.C.
3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they
conduct or sponsor. ``Collection of information'' is defined in 44
U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or
requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records,
or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the
PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a
60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed
collection of information before submitting the collection to OMB for
approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice

of the proposed collections of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collections of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Bacterial Detection Testing by Blood Collection Establishments and
Transfusion Services To Enhance the Safety and Availability of
Platelets for Transfusion

    We have identified the following recommendations in the draft
guidance document as collections of information. In section V, the
draft guidance recommends that blood collection establishments have in
place measures to promptly alert the transfusion services in the event
that a distributed platelet product is subsequently identified as
positive for bacterial contamination. In section IX.A.2, the draft
guidance recommends that following secondary testing, a tie-tag should
be attached to the platelet products to relay the following
information: Type of bacterial detection test performed (rapid or
culture); date and time the bacterial detection test was performed;
and, the results of the bacterial detection testing. The draft guidance
also recommends that a single tie-tag may be attached to a pooled
platelet product.
    Description of Respondents: The third-party disclosure and one-time
recordkeeping recommendations described in the draft guidance affect
blood collection establishments and transfusion services that collect
and manufacture platelet products for transfusion, including WBD
platelets, platelets collected by automated methods from a single donor
(apheresis platelets), pooled platelets, and platelets stored in
additive solutions.
    Burden Estimate: The Agency believes the information collection
provision for licensed blood collection establishments in section V
does not create a new burden for respondents and is part of usual and
customary business practice. Blood collection establishments currently
have in place standard operating procedures for notifying consignees
(transfusion services) if a distributed platelet product has
subsequently tested positive for bacterial contamination.
    In section IX.A.2, the draft guidance recommends that following
secondary testing, a tie-tag should be attached to the platelet
products to relay certain information related to the bacterial
detection test. FDA estimates the burden of this collection of
information as follows:

                                                Table 1--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                              Labeling                                  Number of     disclosures per    Total annual    Average burden    Total hours
                                                                       respondents       respondent      disclosures     per disclosure
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under section IX.A.2, a tie-tag to the platelet product relaying                150            1,250          187,500              .05            9,375
 specific information following secondary testing should be
 attached..........................................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    Table 1 of this document provides an estimate of the annual third-
party disclosure burden for the information to be submitted in
accordance with the draft guidance. Based on FDA data and information
submitted by industry, FDA believes that there are approximately 2
million platelet transfusions per year and that 75 percent or 1.5
million transfusions occur at large volume transfusion services. FDA
also believes that on average, the large volume transfusion services
perform about 5,000 platelet transfusions annually. Furthermore, FDA
approximates that 150 transfusion services, most of which will be large
volume transfusion services, may elect to perform secondary testing. We
expect that secondary testing will be used primarily for the extension
of dating up to 7 days at large volume transfusion services. However,
while each of the 150 transfusion services may issue, on average, 5,000
platelets a year, secondary testing will be performed on only a portion
of these platelets. Based on FDA experience, we estimate that secondary
testing will be performed on approximately 25 percent or 1,250
platelets to permit transfusion beyond day 5. Thus, the total estimated
annual burden of 9,375 hours for transfusion services to implement the
recommendation in Table 1 is based on FDA's experience and industry
information.

                                                   Table 2--Estimated One-Time Recordkeeping Burden 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                       Average burden
                          Creation of SOPs                              Number of       records per      Total annual         per          Total hours
                                                                      recordkeepers     recordkeeper       records       recordkeeping
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under section IX.A.2, a tie-tag to the platelet product relaying                150                1              150               16            2,400
 specific information following secondary testing should be
 attached..........................................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    Table 2 of this document provides a one-time recordkeeping burden
estimate for the information to be submitted in accordance with the
draft guidance. As described in the proceeding paragraphs, based on
FDA's experience and industry information, FDA anticipates that 150
respondents, mainly from large volume transfusion services, will
implement the recommendations set forth in section IX.A.2. Thus, based
on FDA data and industry recordkeeping information, FDA estimates that
the total estimated one-time recordkeeping burden is 2,400 hours.
    This draft guidance also refers to previously approved collections
of information found in FDA regulations. The collections of information
in 21 CFR 601.12 and 610.60 have been approved under OMB control number
0910-0338; the collections of information in 21 CFR 606.65, 606.100,
606.120, 606.121, 606.122, and 606.140 have been approved under OMB
control number 0910-0116; and the collections of information in 21 CFR
607.3, 607.7 and 607.65 have been approved under OMB control number
0910-0052.

III. Comments

    The draft guidance is being distributed for comment purposes only
and is not intended for implementation at this time. Interested persons
may submit either electronic comments regarding this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to send one set of
comments. Identify comments with the docket number found in brackets in
the heading of this document. Received comments may be seen in the
Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

IV. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the draft guidance
at either http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: December 4, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-28809 Filed 12-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 44 (Thursday, March 5, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12877-12882]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04453]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2019-0562; FRL-10006-12-Region 3]

Air Plan Approval; Pennsylvania; Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Under the 2008
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve two state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. These revisions address certain
reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements, including
those related to Control Technique Guidelines (CTGs) for volatile
organic compounds (VOC) and the addition of regulations controlling VOC
emissions from industrial cleaning solvents. These submissions are part
of Pennsylvania's efforts to implement RACT for the 2008 ozone national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). This action is being taken under
the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 6, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2019-0562 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Talley, Planning &
Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone number is (215) 814-
2117. Mr. Talley can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 13, 2018, the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) submitted to EPA two SIP
revisions which were intended to satisfy some of the RACT requirements
for sources of VOC emissions required by sections 172(c)(l), 182(b)(2)
and 184(b)(l)(B) of the CAA and the implementing regulations for the
2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 12264, March 6, 2015; 40 CFR part 51, subpart
AA). In addition, the submittals were intended to address certain parts
of EPA's ``Findings of Failure to Submit State Implementation Plan
Submittals for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards,''
(82 FR 9158; February 3, 2017). Additionally, these two submittals are
related to another Pennsylvania SIP submission addressing RACT for
major stationary sources of VOC and oxides of nitrogen (NOX)
that was conditionally approved by EPA on May 9, 2019. See section I.C.
of this notice.

I. Background

A. Ozone NAAQS and RACT Requirements

    On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA promulgated a revised standard
for ground level ozone based on 8-hour

average concentrations. The 8-hour averaging period replaced the
previous 1-hour averaging period adopted in 1979, and the level of the
NAAQS was changed from 0.12 parts per million (ppm) to 0.08 ppm. On
April 30, 2004, EPA designated two moderate nonattainment areas in
Pennsylvania under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, namely Philadelphia-
Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE (the Philadelphia Area) and
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley (the Pittsburgh Area). The other 14
nonattainment areas in Pennsylvania were designated marginal
nonattainment. See 69 FR 23858 and 23931; see also 40 CFR 81.339. On
March 27, 2008, EPA strengthened the 8-hour ozone standards by revising
its level to 0.075 ppm averaged over an 8-hour period (2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS). 73 FR 16436. On May 21, 2012, EPA designated five
marginal nonattainment areas in Pennsylvania for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS: Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, Lancaster, Reading, the Philadelphia
Area, and the Pittsburgh Area. See 77 FR 30088.
    In a March 6, 2015 rulemaking entitled ``Implementation of the 2008
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: State Implementation
Plan Requirements'' (2008 Ozone Implementation Rule (80 FR 12264)), EPA
announced its revocation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for all
purposes and for all areas in the country, effective on April 6, 2015.
However, EPA determined that certain nonattainment planning
requirements continue to be in effect as anti-backsliding measures for
the revoked 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for areas designated nonattainment
under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, including RACT. See 80 FR 12264,
12296.
    The CAA regulates emissions of NOX and VOC to prevent
photochemical reactions that result in ozone formation. RACT is an
important strategy for reducing NOX and VOC emissions from
stationary sources within areas not meeting the ozone NAAQS. Since the
1970's, EPA has consistently defined ``RACT'' as the lowest emission
limit that a particular source is capable of meeting by the application
of the control technology that is reasonably available considering
technological and economic feasibility. See December 9, 1976 memorandum
from Roger Strelow, Assistant Administrator for Air and Waste
Management, to Regional Administrators, ``Guidance for Determining
Acceptability of SIP Regulations in Non-Attainment Areas,'' and 44 FR
53762 (September 17, 1979).
    Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides that SIPs for nonattainment
areas must provide for implementation of all reasonably available
control measures (RACM) as expeditiously as possible, including
emissions reductions from existing sources through adoption of RACT.
    Further, section 182(b)(2) of the CAA requires states with ozone
nonattainment areas classified as moderate or higher to submit a SIP
revision requiring implementation of RACT for three specific categories
of sources. First, section 182(b)(2)(A) requires RACT for each category
of VOC sources in the nonattainment area covered by a CTG document
issued by EPA between November 15, 1990 and the date of attainment.
These CTG-related SIP revisions shall be submitted within the period
set forth by EPA in issuing the relevant CTG document. Second, section
182(b)(2)(B) requires RACT for all VOC sources in the area covered by
any CTG issued before November 15, 1990. Third, section 182(b)(2)(C)
requires RACT for all other major stationary sources of VOC located in
the nonattainment area. In addition, section 182(f) subjects major
stationary sources of NOX to the same RACT requirements
applicable to major stationary sources of VOC. EPA has not issued any
CTGs for categories of NOX sources, so the effect of section
182(f) is to require that SIPs also require RACT for major stationary
sources of NOX in accordance with section 182(b)(2)(C). The
ozone RACT requirements under section 182(b)(2) are usually referred to
as VOC CTG RACT, non-CTG VOC RACT, and major NOX RACT.
    A ``major source'' is defined based on the source's potential to
emit (PTE) NOX or VOC, and the applicable ton per year
emission thresholds defining a ``major'' source differ based on the
classification of the nonattainment area in which the source is
located. See sections 182(c)-(f) and 302 of the CAA. In addition,
section 184(a) of the CAA established an Ozone Transport Region (OTR)
comprised of 12 eastern states, including all of Pennsylvania. Pursuant
to section 184(b), the RACT requirements of section 182(b)(2) which
would be applicable if an area were classified as a moderate
nonattainment area apply to all areas within the OTR. This requirement
is referred to as OTR RACT.
    EPA's CTGs establish presumptive RACT level control requirements
for various VOC source categories; that is, they identify a level of
control which EPA recommends as RACT for the affected source category.
In some cases, EPA has issued Alternative Control Techniques guidelines
(ACTs) for source categories, which in contrast to the CTGs, only
present a range for possible control options but do not identify any
particular option as the presumptive norm for what is RACT. EPA has
elaborated upon the RACT requirements through implementation rules for
each ozone NAAQS (40 CFR part 51, subparts X and AA), as well as in
guidance. See also the preamble to the 2008 Ozone Implementation Rule,
80 FR 12264, 12278 (March 6, 2015).
    In the 2008 Ozone Implementation Rule, EPA finalized an approach
that allowed states, in some cases, to certify that sources addressed
by prior RACT determinations for the 1-hour (1979) and/or 1997 ozone
standard do not need to implement additional controls to meet the 2008
RACT requirements. EPA's rationale was that a new RACT determination
for some already controlled sources would either lead to the same or
similar control technology, or that any incremental reductions from an
additional round of RACT would be so small as to render the cost of
achieving such reductions unreasonable. See 80 FR 12264, 12279. RACT
SIPs, therefore, must contain adopted RACT regulations, a certification
that some or all existing RACT provisions are still RACT, and/or
negative declarations that there are no affected sources in the
nonattainment area to which certain CTGs would apply. Id. at 12278. EPA
directed that as part of their RACT SIP submissions, states should
provide adequate documentation that they have considered control
technology that is economically and technically feasible, and that
input arising from public comment periods should be considered as well.
Id. States were required to submit RACT SIP revisions within 24 months
of the July 20, 2012 effective date of designation \1\ for moderate
nonattainment areas. Id. at 12266.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ i.e., by July 20, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Ozone RACT Applicability in Pennsylvania

    As described previously, because all of Pennsylvania is in the OTR,
RACT in Pennsylvania under each ozone NAAQS applies to all major
stationary sources of NOX and VOC, and must be evaluated and
satisfied separately for each ozone NAAQS. At the time of revocation of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (effective April 6, 2015), only two
moderate nonattainment areas remained in the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania for the 1997 standard: The Philadelphia and the Pittsburgh
Areas. As required under EPA's anti-backsliding provisions, these two
moderate nonattainment areas

continue to be subject to RACT under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    RACT applies to major stationary sources of NOX and VOC
under each ozone NAAQS and to any VOC sources subject to CTG RACT. The
definition of a ``major source'' of NOX or VOC differs
depending the nonattainment classification of the area in which the
source is located. Sources located in ozone nonattainment areas are
subject to the ``major source'' definitions established under the CAA.
See CAA sections 182(c)-(e) and section 302(j).
    In addition, because all of Pennsylvania is part of the OTR
established by section 184 of the CAA, marginal ozone nonattainment
areas and ozone attainment areas in Pennsylvania are treated as
moderate nonattainment areas under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for any
planning requirements under the revoked standard, including RACT. The
OTR RACT requirements applicable to moderate nonattainment areas are
also in effect under the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS throughout
Pennsylvania even though there are no nonattainment areas designated
above the marginal classification for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Thus, in
effect, the same RACT requirements for moderate nonattainment areas
continue to be applicable statewide in Pennsylvania under both the 1997
and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See implementing regulations for the 1997 and 2008 ozone
NAAQS, at 40 CFR part 51, subparts X and AA, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Pennsylvania, the SIP program is implemented primarily by PADEP,
but also by local air agencies in Philadelphia County (the City of
Philadelphia Air Management Services (AMS)) and Allegheny County,
(Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD)). These agencies have
implemented numerous RACT regulations and source-specific measures in
Pennsylvania to meet the applicable ozone RACT requirements. Statewide
RACT controls have been promulgated by PADEP in Pennsylvania Code Title
25-Environmental Resources, Part I-Department of Environmental
Protection, Subpart C-Protection of Natural Resources, Article III-Air
Resources, (25 Pa. Code) Chapter 129. AMS and ACHD incorporate by
reference some Pennsylvania regulations, but have also promulgated a
number of regulations adopting RACT controls within their own
jurisdictions. In addition, AMS and ACHD have submitted separate
source-specific RACT determinations as SIP revisions, which have been
approved by EPA. See 40 CFR 52.2020(d)(1).
    States were required to make RACT SIP submissions for the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS by September 15, 2006. PADEP submitted a SIP revision
on September 25, 2006, addressing certain requirements of RACT under
the 1997 ozone NAAQS. On June 27, 2016, PADEP withdrew certain portions
of this SIP prior to EPA approval, related to RACT for major stationary
sources of VOC and NOX. 82 FR 31464 (July 7, 2017). The
remaining portions of this SIP covered CTG source categories for which
Pennsylvania had adopted regulations, as well as negative declarations
for CTG source categories with no such sources located in Pennsylvania.
Id. at 31465. The remaining SIP also certified that three previously-
adopted Pennsylvania regulations covering three non-CTG source
categories continued to constitute RACT for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. Id.
at 31466. EPA found that this 2006 RACT SIP met the requirements for
RACT in CAA section 182(b) and 184(b) for the 1997 NAAQS with respect
to these CTG categories, to the negative declarations, and to these
three specific non-CTG VOC source categories. Id. at 31467. RACT
control measures addressing all applicable CAA RACT requirements under
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS have also been implemented and fully
approved in the jurisdictions of Allegheny County and Philadelphia
County. See 78 FR 34584 (June 10, 2013) and 81 FR 69687 (October 7,
2016).

C. RACT II

    On May 9, 2019, EPA took final action on a Pennsylvania SIP
submittal to satisfy certain CAA RACT requirements under both the 1997
and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for specific source categories. 84 FR
20274. EPA fully approved amendments to 25 Pa. Code section 121.1 and
new provisions identified as 25 Pa. Code sections 129.96, 129.97, and
129.100 as meeting certain aspects of major stationary source RACT in
CAA sections 172, 182, and 184 for the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS. Id.
at 20290. EPA conditionally approved 25 Pa. Code sections 129.98 and
129.99 based on PADEP's commitment to submit additional SIP revisions
to address the deficiencies identified by EPA in the May 16, 2016 SIP
revision. Id. Upon submission of all elements intended to meet the
conditions identified in Section IV of that rulemaking action,
Pennsylvania must submit a SIP revision certifying that it has met all
conditions. If EPA determines that Pennsylvania has satisfied these
conditions, EPA will remove the conditional nature of the approval and
Pennsylvania's 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone RACT SIP revision will, at
that time, receive a full approval status. If Pennsylvania fails to
meet the conditions specified in the final conditional approval action,
the conditional approval of 25 Pa. Code sections 129.98 and 129.99
shall be treated as a disapproval.

II. Summary of SIP Revisions and EPA Analysis

    In the preamble of EPA's final rulemaking for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
implementation plan, EPA indicated that RACT SIPs must contain adopted
RACT regulations, certifications where appropriate that existing
provisions are RACT, and/or negative declarations that there are no
sources in the nonattainment area covered by a specific CTG source
category. 80 FR 12264, 12278, March 6, 2015.
    PADEP's August 13, 2018 SIP submissions are intended to meet the
RACT requirements for VOC under sections 172(c)(1), 182(b)(2) and
184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA and the implementing regulations for the 2008
ozone NAAQS. 40 CFR part 51, subpart XX. These submittals are discussed
in detail in sections II.A. and II.B of this preamble. Additional
information can be found in EPA's Technical Support Document (TSD) in
the docket for this action.

A. Pennsylvania's RACT Certification of CTGs and Request To Incorporate
New Source Performance Standards Into the SIP

    The first submittal is entitled: ``Certification of Reasonably
Available Control Technology for Control Techniques Guidelines Under
the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Incorporation
of 25 Pa Code Chapter 122 (Relating to National Standards of
Performance for New Stationary Sources) into the Commonwealth's State
Implementation Plan.'' This submittal: (1) Certifies that PADEP's
adoption and implementation of regulations to control VOC emissions is
consistent with EPA's CTGs and therefore represents RACT for these
covered CTG sources for the 2008 ozone standard; (2) Incorporates 25
Pa. Code Chapter 122 (relating to national standards of performance for
new stationary sources) into the Pennsylvania SIP and certifies that
those provisions continue to represent RACT for facilities subject to
such standards of performance; and (3) Incorporates specific permit
conditions from certain facilities for the purpose of establishing
source-specific RACT-level controls for those facilities.

1. CTGs
    PADEP developed regulations consistent with each CTG addressed by
the submittal and has determined that each continues to represent RACT
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. A list of the CTGs adopted by Pennsylvania
that PADEP considered in making this determination is found in Table 1
beginning on page 12 of this submittal. PADEP based this certification
on the following: (1) Certification that Pennsylvania's regulations
meet the CAA RACT requirements, are based on the most currently
available technically and economically feasible controls, and represent
RACT for implementation purposes pertaining to the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS; (2) Certification that PADEP has adopted and implemented SIP
approved provisions or regulations addressing applicable EPA CTG source
categories and that these provisions or regulations represent RACT
control levels or control levels more stringent than RACT under the
2008 ozone NAAQS; (3) Certification that PADEP has implemented all CTG
RACT controls indicated in this SIP revision, based on the EPA's
guidance and standards, and that they represent current RACT control
levels under the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS; and (4) Certification that
PADEP has determined that there is a CTG source category for which it
has made a negative declaration because there are no existing sources
for RACT purposes in Pennsylvania.
    PADEP has determined that there are no sources in Pennsylvania
(excluding Philadelphia County and Allegheny County) covered by EPA's
CTG ``Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Large
Petroleum Dry Cleaners,'' (EPA-450/3-82-009; September 1982) and
therefore submitted a negative declaration for that CTG source type.
2. Incorporation by Reference of New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS)
    Pennsylvania has incorporated by reference and therefore adopted
all of the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) promulgated by EPA
under section 111 of the CAA and found at 40 CFR part 60. 25 Pa. Code
122. PADEP determined that for certain source categories, the Federal
requirements of 40 CFR part 60--Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources, provide RACT level control. PADEP has submitted 25
Pa. Code 122 for inclusion into the SIP, consistent with CAA section
182(b)(2). PADEP's August 13, 2018 submittal specifically cites the
requirements of 40 CFR part 60, subparts NNN (relating to synthetic
organic chemical manufacturing industry (``SOCMI'') distillation
operations), RRR (relating to SOCMI reactor processes), and subparts
KKK, OOOO, and OOOOa (relating to natural gas processing facilities),
and certifies that the requirements of these NSPS constitute VOC RACT
under the 2008 ozone NAAQS for the affected source categories.
    EPA's CTG entitled ``Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions
from Reactor Processes and Distillation Operations Processes in the
Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry, EPA-450/4/-91-031,
August 1993'' provides that the NSPS requirements of subparts NNN and
RRR meet the RACT level controls recommended by the CTG. The required
control efficiency of the CTG (98% destruction by weight, or 20 parts
per million by volume (ppmv) dry basis, corrected to 3% oxygen) is the
same as required by the NSPS.\3\ Essentially, any process vent that is
controlled with a combustion device to meet the requirements of the
NSPS would meet the RACT recommendations of the CTG. PADEP identified
five facilities subject to subparts NNN and RRR. Four of these are
subject to control requirements, while one is subject only to record
keeping requirements based on a de minimis emissions exemption,
consistent with the CTG.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 40 CFR 60.662 and 60.702.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    25 Pa. Code 122 also incorporates the Federal NSPS requirements of
40 CFR part 60 subparts KKK, OOOO, OOOOa and the cross-referenced
equipment leak detection and repair (LDAR) requirements of subparts VV
and VVa. The NSPS requirements from subpart KKK are equivalent to the
1983 CTG for the oil and natural gas industry.\4\ Subpart OOOO and
OOOOa incorporated the requirements of subpart KKK. PADEP provided a
comparison between the applicable provisions of the NSPS and EPA's 1983
CTG.\5\ Based on this comparison, PADEP has determined that the NSPS
rules in 40 CFR part 60, subparts KKK, OOOO, and OOOOa, with cross
references to subparts VV and VVa, are at least as stringent as the
requirements in the 1983 CTG for this source category. Therefore, the
Federal NSPS provisions applicable to all of Pennsylvania's current
natural gas processing facility sources are sufficient to implement
RACT for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and meet the requirements of the 1983
Natural Gas Processing Plants CTG. EPA notes that PADEP's August 13,
2018 submittal did not address EPA's ``Control Techniques Guidelines
for the Oil and Natural Gas Industry, EPA-453/B-16-001, October 2016,''
(2016 Oil and Gas CTG). EPA is, therefore, not proposing action on the
submittal in relation to the 2016 Oil and Gas CTG.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Control Techniques Guidelines for the Oil and Natural
Gas Industry, EPA-453/B-16-001, October 2016, Section <IP_ADDRESS>. pp.
8-12, available at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-10/documents/2016-ctg-oil-and-gas.pdf.
    \5\ See Appendix F of PADEP's August 13, 2018 submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Incorporation of Source Specific Permit Limits
    PADEP found only two sources covered by the ``Shipbuilding/Repair
ACT (EPA 453/R-94-032, April 1994) and the EPA's CTG for Shipbuilding
and Ship Repair Operations (Surface Coating) (61 FR 44050, August 27,
1996)'' and one source subject to ``Control of Volatile Organic
Compound Emissions from Air Oxidation Processes in Synthetic Organic
Chemical Manufacturing Industry, EPA-450/3-84-015, December 1984.''
Rather than promulgate a rule to address the RACT requirements of those
two CTGs for only three affected sources, PADEP has incorporated the
requirements of the CTGs into Federally enforceable permits and
submitted the applicable permit limits for incorporation into the SIP.
    Redacted versions of Permit Nos. 25-00930 (Donjon Shipbuilding) and
26-00545 (Heartland Fabrication) were submitted for incorporation into
the Commonwealth's SIP. Generally, the control strategy is to limit the
VOC content of the coatings and materials used. The relevant portions
of the permits are consistent with the Shipbuilding and Ship Repair
Operations (Surface coating) CTG and satisfy the RACT requirements for
these sources.
    A redacted version of Permit No. 39-00024 (Geo. Specialty Chem.
Trimet Div.) was also submitted for incorporation into the SIP. PADEP
certified that this is the only source to which the SOCMI Air Oxidation
Process CTG applies. Pursuant to the CTG, ``It is recommended that air
oxidation facilities for which an existing combustion device is
employed to control process VOC emissions should not be required to
meet the 98 percent emissions limit until the combustion

device is replaced for other reasons. In other words, no facility would
be required to upgrade or replace an existing control device.'' \6\
PADEP determined that the facility's formaldehyde process and catalytic
incinerator were installed in 1980, before the December 1984
applicability date of the CTG. PADEP further determined that neither
the process nor the control device have been modified since the 1980
installation date. PADEP therefore certified that the existing control
strategy and emission limitations in the permit constitute RACT for
this particular source.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See ``Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from
Air Oxidation Processes in the Synthetic Organic Chemical
Manufacturing Industry, EPA, 450/3-84-015, December 1984,'' Page 4-
1, available at: https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/ctgact/198412vocepa4503-84-015airoxidationprocesses.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Regulatory Revisions Related to VOC and NOX RACT

    The changes proposed by PADEP in this second submittal, entitled
``Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Industrial
Cleaning Solvents; General Provisions; Aerospace Manufacturing and
Rework; Additional RACT Requirements for Major Sources of
NOX and VOCs,'' include: (1) The addition of 25 Pa. Code
129.63a (relating to the control of VOC from industrial cleaning
solvents (ICS)); (2) Amendments to sections 121.1 and 129.51
(definitions and ``general'' provisions, respectively) in order to
support the addition and implementation of section 129.63a; (3) A
correction to the VOC emission limit table in section 129.73 (relating
to aerospace manufacturing and re-work); and (4) Amendments to sections
129.96, 129.97, 129.99, and 129.100 to clarify certain requirements and
to update the list of exemptions under RACT II because of previously
adopted presumptive VOC RACT regulations.
    PADEP determined that the recommendations in EPA's 2006 ICS CTG are
technically and economically feasible for sources in this source
category, and developed section 129.63a for the purpose of implementing
VOC RACT for affected sources in Pennsylvania. PADEP adopted the
relevant limits of the CTG in section 129.63a. Pursuant to section
129.63a(a), the regulation applies to owners/operators of facilities in
which industrial cleaning solvents are ``used or applied in a cleaning
activity at a cleaning unit operation, a work production-related work
area, or a part, product, tool, machinery, equipment, vessel, floor or
wall.'' Facilities are subject to section 129.63a if the combined
actual emissions of VOC from all subject cleaning operations exceed 2.7
tons in any 12-month rolling period, before consideration of controls.
Consistent with EPA's CTG, section 129.63a requires one of the
following emissions controls: Solvents with a VOC content of less than
or equal to 0.42 pounds of VOC per gallon (lb/VOC/gal) (or 50 grams of
VOC per liter (50 g/L)), work practice standards (the use of closed
vessels/containers, minimization of air circulation around cleaning
unit operations), or add on capture/control systems with a minimum
efficiency of 85% reduction.
    Section 129.63a(c) exempts certain otherwise applicable sources
from the rule, including: Sources subject to section 129.63 (relating
to degreasing operations) or 40 CFR part 63, subpart T (relating to
national emission standards for halogenated solvent cleaning); sources
where the use or application of the industrial cleaning solvent is
subject to a standard or specification required by the United States
Department of Defense, Federal Aviation Administration or other Federal
government entity; and a number of specific processes, generally
consistent with the exemptions recommended by the CTG.
    In section 129.73, Table II (relating to allowable content of VOC
in aerospace coatings) was revised to correct a numbering error. The
coating type ``High-Temperature Coating'' was numbered incorrectly as
(20)(a) and was renumbered as (21). The succeeding coating types were
renumbered accordingly. The title of Table II was amended to delete the
redundant phrase ``allowable VOC content.''
    As previously discussed, EPA recently approved sections 129.96,
129.97, and 129.100, and conditionally approved sections 129.98 and
129.99 as part of the May 9, 2019 final rulemaking action related to
Pennsylvania's RACT II regulations.\7\ The RACT II Rule applies
statewide to existing major NOX and/or VOC sources in
Pennsylvania, except those subject to other Pennsylvania regulations,
as specified in 25 Pa. Code 129.96(a)-(b). PADEP's August 13, 2018
submittal amends section 129.96(a) and (b) (relating to applicability)
to revise the list of sources exempt from RACT II because a presumptive
RACT requirement or presumptive RACT emission limitation, or both, has
been established elsewhere. The applicability criteria in section
129.96(a) and (b) are revised in order to add reference to sections
129.52d, 129.52e and 129.74 (relating to control of VOC emissions from
miscellaneous metal parts surface coating processes, miscellaneous
plastic parts surface coating processes and pleasure craft surface
coatings; control of VOC emissions from automobile and light-duty truck
assembly coating operations and heavier vehicle coating operations; and
control of VOC emissions from fiberglass boat manufacturing materials).
Additionally, sections 129.97(k)(1)(ii) and 129.99(i)(1)(ii) (relating
to presumptive RACT requirements, RACT emission limitations and
petition for alternative compliance schedule; and alternative RACT
proposal and petition for alternative compliance schedule) were amended
by adding the text ``or major VOC emitting facility'' for clarity.
Section 129.100(a) (relating to compliance demonstration and
recordkeeping requirements) was amended to add ``RACT'' in two places
for clarity. The emission limits and substantive requirements of
sections 129.96, 129.97, 129.99, and 129.100 were not amended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 84 FR 20274.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Proposed Action

    EPA's review of this material indicates that PADEP's submittals are
adequate to meet the ozone-specific RACT requirements for VOC of CAA
sections 172, 182(b)(2)(A) and (B), 182(f), and 184 of the CAA, for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and are in accordance with CAA section 110.
Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve the two Pennsylvania SIP
revisions relating to VOC RACT for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, which were
submitted on August 13, 2018. EPA is soliciting public comments on this
proposed approval. These comments will be considered before taking
final action.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the Pennsylvania rules regarding definitions and permitting
requirements discussed in Section II of this preamble. EPA has made,
and will continue to make, these materials generally available through
https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region III Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this preamble for more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed rule, pertaining to RACT requirements
under the 2008 ozone NAAQS, does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: February 24, 2020.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2020-04453 Filed 3-4-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 3, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3-5]
[FR Doc No: 2011-33569]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1061; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-053-AD;
Amendment 39-16908; AD 2011-27-06]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 7X airplanes equipped with certain ram
air turbine (RAT) transformer rectifier units (TRUs). This AD was
prompted by a report of incorrect design of the TRU part of the RAT
system. This AD requires replacing any affected RAT TRU with a modified
RAT TRU. We are issuing this AD to prevent loose internal wiring in the
RAT generator, which could result in degraded direct current power to
essential airplane systems while the RAT is deployed, which could
adversely affect continued safe flight and landing of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective February 7, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of February 7,
2012.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1137; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on October 11, 2011 (76
FR 62671). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    The manufacturer of the Transformer Rectifier Unit (TRU) part of
the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) system has identified an incorrect design
of the part.
    The internal wiring that conducts the high voltage alternative
current from the RAT generator may become loose due to insufficient
crimping of the wire and contacts.
    This condition, if not corrected, and if occurring while the RAT
is deployed, could result in a degraded direct current power which
is distributed to essential aeroplane systems and therefore
aeroplane operations might be impaired.
    To address this unsafe condition, the manufacturer of the RAT
TRU has developed an improved RAT TRU with a new Part Number (P/N).
    This [European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)] AD requires
replacement of the affected RAT TRU by a modified RAT TRU.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (76 FR 62671, October 11,
2011) or on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed--except for
minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (76 FR 62671, October 11, 2011) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (76 FR 62671, October 11, 2011).

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect about 27 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it will take about 13 work-hours per
product to comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $16,310
per product. Where the service information lists required parts costs
that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no
charge for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for
affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated
here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the AD on U.S.
operators to be $470,205, or $17,415 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 AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will 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 AD:
    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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM (76 FR 62671, October 11,
2011), the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the Docket Operations office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
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]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2011-27-06 Dassault Aviation: Amendment 39-16908. Docket No. FAA-
2011-1061; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-053-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective February 7,
2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 7X airplanes,
all serial numbers, certificated in any category; equipped with any
ram air turbine (RAT) transformer rectifier unit (TRU) having part
number (P/N) 5913703.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 24: Electrical
Power.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of incorrect design of the
transformer rectifier unit (TRU) part of the ram air turbine (RAT)
system. The Federal Aviation Administration is issuing this AD to
prevent loose internal wiring in the RAT generator, which could
result in degraded direct current power to essential airplane
systems while the RAT is deployed, which could adversely affect
continued safe flight and landing of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Actions

    Within 28 months after the effective date of this AD, replace
any RAT TRU having P/N 5913703 with a RAT TRU having P/N 5915825, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault
Mandatory Service Bulletin 7X-163, dated December 1, 2010.

(h) Parts Installation

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install any
RAT TRU having P/N 5913703, on any airplane.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the International
Branch, send it to ATTN: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1137; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC, notify
your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district
office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC

approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(j) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness
Directive 2011-0008, dated January 18, 2011; and Dassault Mandatory
Service Bulletin 7X-163, dated December 1, 2010; for related
information.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) You must use the following service information to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The
Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference (IBR) of the following service information under 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51:
    (i) Dassault Mandatory Service Bulletin 7X-163, dated December
1, 2010.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, South Hackensack, New Jersey
07606; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the 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>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at an NARA facility, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 23, 2011.
John P. Piccola,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-33569 Filed 12-30-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P