[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 222 (Monday, November 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80714-80715]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25575]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2023-0356; FRL-11360-01-OCSPP]

Issuance of Experimental Use Permits

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA has granted experimental use permits (EUP) to the
following pesticide applicants. An EUP permits use of a pesticide for
experimental or research purposes only in accordance with the
limitations in the permit.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madison Le, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511M), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington,
DC 20460-0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. Although this
action may be of particular interest to those persons who conduct or
sponsor research on pesticides, the Agency has not attempted to
describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2023-0356 is available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal

holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP Docket is (202) 566-
1400. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information
about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. EUP

    EPA has issued the following EUPs:
    1. 8917-EUP-3. EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0233. Issuance. J.R. Simplot
Company, 5369 W Irving Street, Boise, ID 83706. This EUP allows the use
of 0.041 pounds of the plant-incorporated protectant (PIP) protein
BLB2, 0.21 pounds of the PIP protein AMR3, 0.21 pounds of the PIP
protein VNT1, and 0.17 pounds of the PIP Potato virus Y (PVY) siRNA on
165 acres of potato to evaluate the control of potato late blight
disease and PVY. The program is authorized only in the States of
Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota,
Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin. The EUP is
effective from March 15, 2023, to April 1, 2024.
    2. 524-EUP-117. EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0036. Issuance. Bayer CropScience
LP 800 North Lindbergh Blvd. St. Louis, Missouri 63167. This EUP allows
the use of 0.93 grams of the plant-incorporated protectant (PIP),
GA20ox_SUP miRNA and the genetic material necessary for is production
on 10,000 acres of corn to evaluate MON 94804 short stature maize,
stack combinations with registered insect-protected corn, and controls.
The program is authorized only in the States of Alabama, Arkansas,
California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Illinois, Kansas,
Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Missouri, North Carolina,
North Dakota, Nebraska, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South
Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, Wisconsin, and the Territory of
Puerto Rico. The EUP is effective from September 20, 2022, to February
28, 2025.
    3. 94614-EUP-1. EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0270. Issuance. GreenLight
Biosciences, Inc. 200 Boston Ave., Suite 1000, Medford, MA 02155. This
EUP allows the use of 8.504 pounds of the active ingredient, Ledprona
(CAS No. 2433753-68-3) double-stranded RNA on 318 acres of potato to
evaluate the control of Colorado Potato Beetle. The program is
authorized only in the States of Idaho, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New
York, Noth Dakota, Oregon, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Washington. The EUP
is effective from May 4, 2023, to April 30, 2025.
    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: November 15, 2023.
Madison Le,
Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2023-25575 Filed 11-17-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


MEMORANDUM

TO:		Public Record for the NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule
		EPA Docket Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2009-0274 (www.regulations.gov)

FROM:	 Carey A. Johnston, P.E.
      USEPA/OECA/OC
            ph:<PHONE_NUMBER>
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
DATE:		17 November 2011

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: 	Description of the PCS and ICIS-NPDES [DCN 0008]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      A.    The Permit Compliance System (PCS)

      EPA uses the Permit Compliance System (PCS), a national data system developed in 1982, to support the NPDES program. PCS, which is managed by the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), is a critical information system for EPA's Office of Water and OECA. PCS tracks NPDES permit issuance, permit limits, self-monitoring data, enforcement and inspection activity for NPDES facilities regulated under the CWA. PCS currently tracks data for 16 states. The data from 34 other states, 19 territories, 2 tribes and 10 EPA Regional offices that had previously been in PCS were migrated to ICIS-NPDES, the modernized system. PCS, identified as a mission critical system for the Agency, is one of the Agency's largest and most complex systems, given the large number of transactions and the variety of information sources for hundreds of thousands of NPDES permittees. The NPDES Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) that the permitting authorities collect and process constitute the second largest data collection effort within the federal government, accounting for close to 30 million records.

      The PCS Policy Statement (as amended) identified the data elements that were expected to be entered or otherwise provided by the states to EPA through PCS. This policy statement and accompanying data requirements allowed PCS to function for many years as a useful management tool for the NPDES program, providing EPA with a nationally consistent set of facility-specific NPDES information, particularly for major facilities.

      B.    The NPDES component of the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS-NPDES)

      The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) serves as the repository for multi-media compliance and enforcement data at the federal level. The development of ICIS was divided into three phases. The first phase focused on developing a system to integrate federal enforcement and compliance activities. The second phase focused on the incorporation of the NPDES program specific requirements, thus creating the ICIS-NPDES component which is intended as a replacement national NPDES data system for PCS. The third phase, under discussion, may add air-related program-specific requirements.

      C.    Why the Change from PCS to ICIS-NPDES?

      When EPA and the NPDES-authorized states developed the Water Enforcement National Data Base (WENDB) list of data elements for PCS, NPDES agencies were focused on the control and reduction of pollutant discharges from the identified point sources of pollution that were priorities for national attention at the time, specifically, major dischargers. The NPDES program has evolved considerably since then. EPA now recognizes the need to better quantify and address the environmental impacts from nonmajor point sources (including wet weather sources) as well. The changes in the focus of the NPDES program implementation necessitate change in the data to be tracked and in the areas in which program oversight is conducted.

      Given the significant advances in computer technology in the past twenty years, the underlying database technology supporting the PCS data system has grown increasingly outdated and unsupported, making it impractical to upgrade and difficult for EPA and NPDES-authorized states to maintain. The PCS data system is also not capable of handling the increase in the expanded NPDES universe. EPA and states modified their NPDES data systems to address new program requirements, but not necessarily in a nationally consistent or methodical manner. Without a systematic approach, difficulty obtaining the necessary data to make strategic program decisions from each state and EPA Region, including data needed to respond to requests received by EPA, hampers EPA's ability to provide timely responses to both Congress and the public on pollutant discharges and trends of national or regional significance. This lack of timely access to nationally consistent NPDES information from the states has undermined the Agency's capacity to conduct program oversight and to make the best-informed program management decisions.

      EPA has worked closely with its state partners in an effort to modernize PCS and eventually replace it with ICIS-NPDES. ICIS-NPDES was designed to improve EPA's and states' ability to track and manage information related to all NPDES sources. The new ICIS-NPDES ensures that the more traditional NPDES information remains available, accessible, and useful, and also provides means to track and access other NPDES information that was not historically available in PCS.

      There are substantial benefits derived from a more modern NPDES data system. Through this rule's requirement for electronic reporting of NPDES information, ICIS-NPDES will capture information for all permitted NPDES sources, improve NPDES agencies' capacity to evaluate compliance, perform watershed analysis, evaluate trends in NPDES program implementation, and report to Congress. ICIS-NPDES would continue to support the public's access to information through Agency web sites providing a more complete picture of the NPDES program for EPA, its state partners, Congress and the public.


studies have shown that HCB can cause renal toxicity and tumors. HCB,
however, does not produce these renal effects by the same biochemical
mechanism of action as chlorothalonil. HCB studies show that renal
tumors may result from an accumulation of protein droplets in the
kidney caused by an accumulation of a kidney cell substance called
alpha-2U-globulin or an accumulation of porphyrins in the urine. There
is no evidence that chlorothalonil leads to the accumulation of either
of these substances. Further, metabolism studies with HCB show no
evidence that HCB results in the production of cysteine conjugates and
their byproducts, which lead to the renal toxicity seen with
chlorothalonil.
    Based on the foregoing, the available data show that chlorothalonil
does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with any of the chemicals
in the polychlorinated fungicide class. FFDCA does not require EPA to
conduct a cumulative effects risk assessment for chemicals that do not
have a common mechanism of toxicity. Therefore, EPA concludes that it
has adequate reliable data on the potential cumulative effects of
chlorothalonil to support its decision that it will be safe for
children to remove the additional 10X safety factor.
    5. Conclusion. Contrary to the States' contentions, EPA does not
lack reliable data on chlorothalonil pertaining to neurotoxicity,
endocrine effects, or cumulative effects from substances with a common
mechanism of toxicity. Therefore, the States' objection to the removal
of the children's safety factor has not been substantiated. Because the
States' argument that the chlorothalonil tolerances are unsafe rested
wholly on their assertion that retention of the children's safety
factor was required, their petition to revoke the chlorothalonil
tolerances is denied.

VIII. Response to Comments on the Petition to Revoke

    Many points raised in comments from the pesticide industry groups
and individual pesticide manufacturers have been specifically relied
upon by EPA in its decision. To the extent these commenters addressed
issues not addressed in this Order or presented arguments that were not
necessary to reach in responding to the petition, EPA expresses no
opinion on such comments. One such issue, however, deserves brief
mention. GB Biosciences contested the States' claim regarding the
potential cumulative effects of chlorothalonil and HCB by pointing out
that HCB is only a minor contaminant of certain pesticides and, thus,
it is relatively meaningless whether chlorothalonil and HCB share a
common mechanism because cumulative exposure to chlorothalonil

and HCB would not be substantially greater than chlorothalonil alone.
(Ref. 18 at 5). This assertion appears to have some force but EPA did
not analyze it closely due to its conclusion that chlorothalonil and
HCB operate by different mechanisms.
    Some of the comments made by CLA have previously been submitted in
the public participation procedures EPA used in developing the various
FQPA science policies, including the children's safety policy. EPA
reaffirms its earlier responses to such comments. (See Ref. 29).
Further, EPA notes its disagreement with CLA's claim that a pesticide
database cannot be incomplete with regard to endocrine effects because
EPA has not imposed data requirements pursuant to the endocrine
screening program. This claim is no more correct than the States'
opposite assertion - that all pesticide databases are incomplete and
require retention of the 10X factor because EPA has not imposed data
requirements under the endocrine screening program. EPA's standard data
requirements on pesticides address many endocrine-related issues and to
the extent any of those data are missing, the relative incompleteness
of the database relative to endocrine effects would have to be taken
into account in making a decision on the children's safety factor.
    NRDC's comment on the sensitivity of the DNT study was previously
addressed by EPA in its Order denying NRDC's objections to various
tolerances. See 70 FR 46706, 46722-46724 (August 10, 2005). NRDC's
other comments concerned matters (e.g., exposure of farm children to
pesticides) that were not raised in the States' petition and thus are
not relevant to EPA's response to that petition.
    Comments citing the alleged benefits of some of the pesticides
named in the petition are not relevant to the petition because benefit
considerations are strictly circumscribed under section 408 and have no
applicability to the threshold risk issues involved in the petition.
See 21 U.S.C. 346a(b)(2)(B).

IX. Regulatory Assessment Requirements

    As indicated previously, this action announces the Agency's order
denying, in part, a petition filed under section 408(d) of FFDCA. As
such, this action is an adjudication and not a rule. The regulatory
assessment requirements imposed on rulemaking do not, therefore, apply
to this action.

X. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), as added by
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, does
not apply because this action is not a rule for purposes of 5 U.S.C.
804(3).

XI. References

     1. Petition of New York, California, Connecticut and Massachusetts
for Modification of Tolerances for Pesticide Chemical Residues
Established in Reregistration Eligibility Determinations for the
Following Chemicals: Alachlor; Chlorothalonil; Methomyl; Metribuzin;
Thiodicarb (December 17, 2004) (petition addressed to Michael O.
Leavitt, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency).
     2. U.S. EPA, A User's Guide to Available EPA Information on
Assessing Exposure to Pesticides in Food 11 (March 2000) [hereinafter
cited as ``User's Guide''].
     3. U.S. EPA, Residue Chemistry Test Guidelines: OPPTS 860.1500
Crop Field Trials 1 (August 1996).
     4. Office of Pesticide Programs, US EPA, Determination of the
Appropriate FQPA Safety Factor(s) in Tolerance Assessment 13-16
(January 31, 2002) (available at http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/trac/science/determ.pdf
).

     5. US EPA, Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing Advisory
Committee Final Report (August 1998) (available at http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/oscpendo/edspoverview/finalrpt.htm
).

     6. Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, US EPA,
Reregistration Eligibility Decision: Alachlor (December 1998).
     7. US EPA, Permanent Tolerances by Pesticide: Aug. 1996 TIS 13-14
(August 2002) (available at http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/tolerance/pdf_files/TolUniv8-05-2002.PDF
).

     8. Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, US EPA,
Memorandum from Marcia E. Mulkey to Lois Rossi, A Common Mechanism of
Toxicity Determination for Chloroacetanilide Pesticides (July 10,
2001).
     9. Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances,
Memorandum from Alberto Proetzel to Felicia Fort, ACETOCHLOR/ALACHLOR:
Cumulative Risk Assessment for the Chloroacetanilides (March 8, 2006).
     10. Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, US
EPA, Reregistration Eligibility Decision: Chlorothalonil (April 1999).
     11. Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, US
EPA, Reregistration Eligibility Decision: Methomyl (December 1998).
     12. Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, US
EPA, Reregistration Eligibility Decision: Metribuzin (February 1998).
     13.Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, US EPA,
Reregistration Eligibility Decision: Thiodicarb (December 1998).
     14. Croplife America, Comments of CropLife America on the Petition
of New York, California, Connecticut, and Massachusetts for
Modification of Tolerances for Certain Pesticides (June 2005).
     15. Pesticide Policy Coalition, Comments on Petition of Attorney
Generals of New York, California, Connecticut and Massachusetts to
Revoke or Modify Tolerances (June 15, 2005).
     16. Monsanto Company, Docket ID Number OPP-2005-0050 (April 28,
2005).
     17. Monsanto Company, Alachlor: Evaluation of the Potential for
Endocrine Disruption (December 20, 2002).
     18. GB Biosciences Corp., Docket ID Number OPP-2005-0050 (June 14,
2005).
     19. GB Biosciences Corp., Chlorothalonil White Paper on
Neurotoxicity and Endocrine Disruption (December 20, 2005).
     20. Bayer Crop Science, Comments by Bayer CropScience Specific to
the Named Chemicals Metribuzin (EPA 738-R-97-066) and Thiodicarb (EPA
738-R-98-022) (June 15, 2005).
     21. DuPont Crop Protection, Re: Petition of New York, California,
Connecticut, and Massachusetts for Modification of Tolerances for
Certain Pesticides (June 9, 2005).
     22. NRDC, Re: Petition of New York, California, Connecticut, and
Massachusetts to Modify Tolerances for Alachlor, Chlorothalonil,
Methomyl, Metribuzin, and Thiodicarb (May 9, 2005).
    23. Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, US EPA,
Memorandum from Douglas Dotson to Paula Deschamp, Metribuzin Acute and
Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessments (April 17, 2006).
     24. Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, US
EPA, Memorandum from P.V. Shah to Pete Caulkins, HED Response to
Questions Raised by SRRD Regarding Chlorothalonil (June 22, 2006).
     25. Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances, US
EPA, Letter from Clifford Gabriel to Erik Olson, Attachment B (March 8,
2005).

     26. U.S. EPA, Guidance for Identifying Pesticide Chemicals and
Other Substances that Have a Common Mechanism of Toxicity (Jan. 29,
1999).
     27. Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S. EPA, Guidance on Cumulative
Risk Assessment of Pesticide Chemicals That Have a Common Mechanism of
Toxicity (Jan. 14, 2002).
     28. McMahon, Timothy, U.S. EPA, The Carcinogenicity of
Chlorothalonil: Data in Support of a Non-linear Mechanism of
Carcinogenicity (Presented to the July 29-30, 1998 FIFRA Scientific
Advisory Panel).
    29. Office of Pesticide Programs, US EPA, Office of Pesticide
Programs' Policy on the Determination of the Appropriate FQPA Safety
Factor(s) For Use in the Tolerance Setting Process: Response to
Comments (February 28, 2002) (available at http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/trac/science/fqpa_resp.pdf
).

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, pesticides, and pest.

    Dated: July 24, 2006.
James Jones,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 06-6605 Filed 8-1-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register: January 11, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 7)]
[Notices]
[Page 1749-1750]
[DOCID:fr11ja06-31]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0469; FRL-7754-6]

Exposure Modeling Work Group; Notice of Public Meeting

AGENCY:  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:  Notice.

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

SUMMARY:  The Exposure Modeling Work Group (EMWG) will hold a 1 day
meeting on January 24, 2006. This notice announces the location and
time for the meeting and sets forth the tentative agenda topics.

DATES:  The meeting will be held on January 24, 2006 from 9 a.m. to 3
p.m.

ADDRESSES:  The meeting will be held at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Crystal Mall 2,
Room 1126 (Fishbowl), 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA 22202.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Mark Corbin, Environmental Fate and
Effects Division (7507C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-
mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

     This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
particular interest to those persons who are or may be required to
conduct testing of chemical substances under the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA), the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), or
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Since
other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to
describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.
If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to
a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information?

    1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this
action under docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0469.
The official public docket consists of the documents specifically
referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other
information related to this action. Although, a part of the official
docket,

the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
The official public docket is the collection of materials that is
available for public viewing at the Public Information and Records
Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall -2, 1801 S. Bell St.,
Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.

     EDOCKET, EPA's electronic public docket and comment system was
replaced on November 25,2005, by an enhanced Federal-wide electronic
docket management and comment system located at http://www.regulations.gov/.
 Follow the on-line instructions.

     An electronic version of the public docket is available through
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may
use EPA Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to view public comments,

access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket,
and to access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically. Although, not all docket materials may be available
electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available
docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I.B.1.
Once in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the appropriate
docket ID number.

II. Background

     On a quarterly interval, the Exposure Modeling Workgroup meets to
discuss current issues in modeling pesticide fate, transport, and
exposure to pesticides in support of risk assessment in a regulatory
context.

III. How Can I Request to Participate in this Meeting?

     You may submit a request to participate in this meeting to the
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Do not submit any
information in your request that is considered CBI. Requests to
participate in the meeting, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2005-0269, must be received on or before 30 days after date of
publication in the Federal Register.

IV. Tentative Agenda

    1. Welcome and Introductions
    2. Old Action Items
    3. Brief Updates
     PRZM3.12.2 Evaluation (J. Hetrick)
     EFED's Modeling Scenarios (M. Corbin)
     Terrestrial Field Dissipation (M. Corbin)
     Spray Drift Update (N. Birchfield)
    4. Major Topics
     The FOCUS Version Control Process - (Russell Jones, Bayer
CropScience)
     EFED Quality Assurance Procedures for Tools Involving the
Use of Environmental Data - (Lisa Eisenhauer, OPP-EFED)
     Version Control for Great Lakes Models on Unix Systems -
(Russell Kreis, ORD-NHERL)
     Model Development and Version Control Using a
Collaboration Envionment (COLAB) - (TBD, USDA-ARS, Great Plains Systems
Research Unit)
     Model Version Control in EPA Air Models - (TBD)
     Evaluation of the AGDISP Ground Boom Spray Drift Model -
(Al Barefoot, CropLife America

List of Subjects

     Environmental protection, Modeling, Pesticides, pests.

    Dated: January 4, 2006.
Steven Bradbury,
Director, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. E6-101 Filed 1- 10-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 247 (Thursday, December 24, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 80242-80247]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30881]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-0828; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-146-AD;
Amendment 39-18341; AD 2015-25-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2013-23-03,
which applies to certain The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B,
747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-400D,
747-400F, and 747SR series airplanes. AD 2013-23-03 required a detailed
inspection of certain attach fittings for a cylindrical defect, and
replacement if necessary. For certain airplanes, this new AD requires
new inspections of the inboard actuator attach fittings for machining
defects, and overhaul or replacement if necessary. This new AD also
limits the compliance time for doing the replacement for certain other
airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report that a machining defect was
also found on some of the actuator assemblies inspected during
manufacture. This defect could lead to fatigue cracking and subsequent
fracture. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct defective
inboard actuator attach fittings which, combined with loss of the
outboard actuator load path, could result in uncontrolled retraction of
the outboard flap, damage to flight control systems, and consequent
reduced controllability of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective January 28, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference

of a certain publication listed in this AD as of January 28, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain other publication listed in this AD as of
November 29, 2013 (78 FR 68345, November 14, 2013).

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
0828.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.govby searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
0828; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nathan Weigand, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
425-917-6590; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2013-23-03, Amendment 39-17658 (78 FR 68345,
November 14, 2013). AD 2013-23-03 applied to certain The Boeing Company
Model 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F,
747-300, 747-400, 747-400D, 747-400F, and 747SR series airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 15, 2015 (80 FR 20178).
The NPRM was prompted by a report that a machining defect was also
found on some of the actuator assemblies inspected during manufacture.
The NPRM proposed to continue to require doing a detailed inspection of
certain attach fittings for a cylindrical defect and replacing if
necessary. This defect could lead to fatigue cracking and subsequent
fracture. For certain airplanes, the NPRM proposed to mandate new
inspections of the inboard actuator attach fittings for machining
defects, and overhaul or replacement, if necessary. The NPRM also
proposed to limit the compliance time for doing the replacement for
certain other airplanes. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
defective inboard actuator attach fittings which, combined with loss of
the outboard actuator load path, could result in uncontrolled
retraction of the outboard flap, damage to flight control systems, and
consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM (80
FR 20178, April 15, 2015) and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request to Add Terminating Action

    Boeing asked that we revise the NPRM (80 FR 20178, April 15, 2015)
to specify that no additional action is required for a wall thickness
of 0.140 inch or greater with no machining defect present, as also
provided in Table 1 of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443,
Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014.
    We agree with the commenter that no additional action is required
for a wall thickness of 0.140 inch or greater with no machining defect
present. However, we do not agree with the request to revise the AD
because if this condition exists, no action is required by this AD.
Only actions that are required to address the identified unsafe
condition are specified in this AD. We have made no change to the AD in
this regard.

Request to Revise Certain Requirements

    Paragraph (k) of the proposed AD (80 FR 20178, April 15, 2015)
would have affected certain inboard actuator attach fittings that were
inspected using Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, dated
September 12, 2013. United Airlines (UAL) requested that we remove this
inspection criterion. UAL noted that there was no requirement to
identify the actuators; therefore, operators would not be likely to
positively identify them. UAL added that actuators are not likely to be
tracked in position, and could have been moved between airplanes as a
result of maintenance. UAL also stated that, in general, it would be
better if the AD as a whole was worded not to depend on a record of
previous inspection accomplishment, but rather on parts identification.
    We acknowledge the commenter's concerns. We realize that paragraph
(k) of this AD is predicated on the fact that operators kept records
from the inspection specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
57A2443, dated September 12, 2013. The intent of this AD is to either
replace inboard actuator attach fittings having part number (P/N)
65B08564-7, or to inspect P/N 65B08564-7 for cylindrical defects,
machining defects, and wall thickness, and accomplish applicable
corrective actions. For that reason we have changed the introductory
text of paragraph (k) of this AD so that it applies to airplanes on
which doing the detailed inspection required by paragraph (h)(1) of
this AD was done before the effective date of this AD and a cylindrical
defect was found but a replacement was not done. We have also revised
paragraph (k)(1) of this AD to require an ultrasonic inspection to
determine the minimum thickness or mechanically determine the minimum
thickness and to allow a records review for the inspections. This
change ensures all inspections are done on airplanes with P/N 65B08564-
7 that did not replace P/N 65B08564-7 after complying with AD 2013-23-
03, Amendment 39-17658 (78 FR 68345, November 14, 2013).
    To address airplanes on which inboard actuator attach fittings were
replaced after complying with paragraph (h)(1) of AD 2013-23-03,
Amendment 39-17658 (78 FR 68345, November 14, 2013), we have added new
paragraph (m) to this AD, which specifies that for airplanes on which
the detailed inspection required by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD is done
before the effective date of this AD and the inboard actuator attach
fitting has been replaced since that inspection, the inspection to
determine the part number specified in paragraph (g) of this AD must be
done within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, and the
applicable actions specified in paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of this AD
must be done within the applicable times specified in paragraphs (h),
(i), and (j) of this AD. We have also added a records review as an
option if records are available that can conclusively determine the
part number. We

redesignated subsequent paragraphs accordingly.

Request to Add Inspection

    UAL stated that the actions specified in paragraph (l) of the
proposed AD (80 FR 20178, April 15, 2015) would also depend on the
record of findings from inspections made in accordance with AD 2013-23-
03, Amendment 39-17658 (78 FR 68345, November 14, 2013). UAL added that
there was no AD requirement to record these findings. UAL noted that
operators conducted the inspections and took actions that were
required. UAL stated that it would be better to call out a new
inspection in the AD to determine which condition the actuator is in,
and then take action as appropriate.
    We acknowledge the commenter's concerns. We have revised paragraph
(l) of this AD to specify that no actuator attach fitting having P/N
65B08564-7 may be installed on any airplane unless the inspection
specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD is done prior to installation
and the applicable actions specified in paragraphs (i) and (j) of this
AD are done within the applicable times specified in paragraphs (i) and
(j) of this AD. We have also added a records review as an option if
records are available that can conclusively determine if the actions
have been done.

Change to Paragraph (h)(2) of the Proposed AD ((80 FR 20178, April 15,
2015)

    We have revised paragraph (h)(2) of this AD by referring to Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014, as
an appropriate source of service information for accomplishing the
required actions.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the change described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (80 FR 20178, April 15, 2015) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (80 FR 20178, April 15, 2015).
    We also determined that this change will not increase the economic
burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, dated
September 12, 2013; and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443,
Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014. The service information describes
procedures for new inspections of the inboard actuator attach fittings
for machining defects, and overhaul or replacement, if necessary. This
service information is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 184 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            Cost per
              Action                    Labor cost         Parts cost        product      Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Retained inspection for part       7 work-hours x $85                $0            $595  $109,480
 number in AD 2013[dash]23-03,      per hour = $595.
 Amendment 39[dash]17658 (78 FR
 68345, November 14, 2013).
New proposed inspections for       8 work-hours x $85                 0             680  $125,120
 machining defect.                  per hour = $680.
Replacement for airplanes without  6 work-hours x $85            13,720          14,230  $14,230 per airplane
 any defect.                        per hour = $510.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
a cost estimate for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.

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 have 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 that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) 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.

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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2013-23-03, Amendment 39-17658 (78 FR 68345, November 14, 2013), and
adding the following new AD:
2015-25-03 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18341; Docket No. FAA-
2015-0828; Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-146-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective January 28, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2013-23-03, Amendment 39-17658 (78 FR 68345,
November 14, 2013).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B,
747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747-400, 747-
400D, 747-400F, and 747SR series airplanes, certificated in any
category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
57A2443, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57, Wings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of the fracture of an inboard
actuator attach fitting of the outboard flap. An inspection of the
attach fitting revealed that it was incorrectly machined with a
cylindrical profile instead of a conical profile, resulting in
reduced wall thickness. A machining defect was also found on some
actuator assemblies inspected during manufacture at the point where
the tapered machining transitioned to the hemispherical machining at
the top of the inner surface. This defect could lead to fatigue
cracking and subsequent fracture. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct defective inboard actuator attach fittings which,
combined with loss of the outboard actuator load path, could result
in uncontrolled retraction of the outboard flap, damage to flight
control systems, and consequent reduced controllability of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Retained Part Number Inspection With Revised Service Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD
2013-23-03, Amendment 39-17658 (78 FR 68345, November 14, 2013),
with revised service information. Within 90 days after November 29,
2013 (the effective date of AD 2013-23-03): Inspect to determine the
part number of the inboard actuator attach fittings of the outboard
flaps, in accordance with Part 1 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, dated September 12,
2013; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1,
dated June 23, 2014. As of the effective date of this AD, only
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June
23, 2014, may be used.

(h) Retained Actions for Certain Attach Fittings With Revised Service
Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD
2013-23-03, Amendment 39-17658 (78 FR 68345, November 14, 2013),
with revised service information. If, during the inspection required
by paragraph (g) of this AD, any inboard actuator attach fitting
having part number (P/N) 65B08564-7 is found, before further flight,
do the actions specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Do a detailed inspection of the inboard actuator attach
fitting for a cylindrical defect, in accordance with Part 2 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
57A2443, dated September 12, 2013; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014. As of the effective
date of this AD, only Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443,
Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014, may be used. For airplanes on which
the detailed inspection is done before the effective date of this
AD: If any cylindrical defect is found, before further flight, do
the actions specified in paragraph (h)(1)(i) or (h)(1)(ii) of this
AD.
    (i) Do a minimum thickness inspection of the inboard actuator
attach fitting to determine minimum wall thickness of the actuator
fitting assembly, in accordance with Part 3 of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, dated
September 12, 2013; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443,
Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014. If the minimum thickness of the
wall is less than 0.130 inch: Before further flight, replace the
inboard actuator attach fitting of the outboard flap, in accordance
with Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, dated September 12, 2013.
    (ii) Replace the inboard actuator attach fitting of the outboard
flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, dated September 12,
2013.
    (2) Replace the inboard actuator attach fitting of the outboard
flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, dated September 12,
2013; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1,
dated June 23, 2014. As of the effective date of this AD, only
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June
23, 2014, may be used.

(i) New Actions for Certain Airplanes on Which Any Cylindrical Defect
Is Found

    For airplanes on which the detailed inspection required by
paragraph (h)(1) of this AD is done on or after the effective date
of this AD: If any cylindrical defect is found during any inspection
required by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, before further flight, do
the actions specified in paragraph (i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Determine the minimum wall thickness of the actuator attach
fitting either by doing an ultrasonic inspection or by mechanically
measuring the thickness and do a detailed inspection of the inner
conical section to determine if the machining defect is present, in
accordance with Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014.
    (i) If the minimum thickness of the wall is less than 0.130
inch: Before further flight, replace the inboard actuator attach
fitting of the outboard flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
57A2443, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014.
    (ii) If the minimum thickness of the wall is 0.140 inch or
greater and the machining defect is present, before further flight,
do the actions specified in paragraph (i)(1)(ii)(A) or (i)(1)(ii)(B)
of this AD.
    (A) Overhaul the inboard actuator attach fitting of the outboard
flap, in accordance with Part 5 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June
23, 2014.
    (B) Replace the inboard actuator attach fitting of the outboard
flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June
23, 2014.
    (iii) If the minimum thickness of the wall is 0.130 inch or
greater and less than 0.140 inch and the machining defect is not
present, within 48 months or 3,000 flight cycles after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first, replace the inboard
actuator attach fitting of the outboard flap, in accordance with
Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014.
    (iv) If the minimum thickness of the wall is 0.130 inch or
greater and less than 0.140 inch and the machining defect is
present, before further flight, replace the inboard actuator attach
fitting of the outboard flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
57A2443, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014.
    (2) Replace the inboard actuator attach fitting of the outboard
flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June
23, 2014.

(j) New Actions for Airplanes on Which No Cylindrical Defects Are Found

    If no cylindrical defect is found during any inspection required
by paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, within 24 months after the effective
date of this AD, do the actions specified in paragraph (j)(1) or
(j)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Determine the minimum wall thickness of the actuator attach
fitting either by doing an ultrasonic inspection or by mechanically
measuring the thickness and do a detailed inspection of the inner
conical section to determine if the machining defect is present, in
accordance with Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014.

    (i) If the minimum thickness of the wall is less than 0.130
inch: Before further flight, replace the inboard actuator attach
fitting of the outboard flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747
57A2443, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014.
    (ii) If the minimum thickness of the wall is 0.140 inch or
greater and the machining defect is present, before further flight,
do the actions specified in paragraph (j)(1)(ii)(A) or (j)(1)(ii)(B)
of this AD.
    (A) Overhaul the inboard actuator attach fitting of the outboard
flap, in accordance with Part 5 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June
23, 2014.
    (B) Replace the inboard actuator attach fitting of the outboard
flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June
23, 2014.
    (iii) If the minimum thickness of the wall is 0.130 inch or
greater and less than 0.140 inch and the machining defect is not
present, within 48 months or 3,000 flight cycles after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first, replace the inboard
actuator attach fitting of the outboard flap, in accordance with
Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014.
    (iv) If the minimum thickness of the wall is 0.130 inch or
greater and less than 0.140 inch and the machining defect is
present, before further flight, replace the inboard actuator attach
fitting of the outboard flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
57A2443, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014
    (2) Replace the inboard actuator attach fitting of the outboard
flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June
23, 2014.

(k) New Inspection or Replacement for Certain Fittings That Were
Previously Inspected

    For airplanes on which the detailed inspection required by
paragraph (h)(1) of this AD is done before the effective date of
this AD, except as required by paragraph (m) of this AD: If any
cylindrical defect is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (h)(1) of this AD and the replacement of the inboard
actuator attach fitting of the outboard flap was not done as
specified in Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, within 24 months after the
effective date of this AD, do the actions specified in paragraph
(k)(1) or (k)(2) of this AD.
    (1) Do a detailed inspection of the inner conical section for
machining defects and do an ultrasonic inspection to determine the
minimum thickness or mechanically determine the minimum thickness,
in accordance with Part 3 of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June
23, 2014. A review of airplane maintenance records, if available, is
acceptable to determine the wall thickness and to determine if there
are machining defects, provided wall thickness and machining defects
can be positively determined from the records review.
    (i) If any machining defect is found and the minimum thickness
of the wall is 0.140 inch or greater: Before further flight, do the
actions specified in paragraph (k)(1)(i)(A) or (k)(1)(i)(B) of this
AD.
    (A) Overhaul the inboard actuator attach fitting of the outboard
flap, in accordance with Part 5 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June
23, 2014.
    (B) Replace the inboard actuator attach fitting of the outboard
flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June
23, 2014.
    (ii) If any machining defect is found and the minimum thickness
of the wall is 0.130 inch or greater and less than 0.140 inch:
Before further flight, replace the inboard actuator attach fitting
of the outboard flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
57A2443, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014.
    (iii) If no machining defect is found and the minimum thickness
of the wall is 0.130 inch or greater and less than 0.140 inch:
Within 48 months or 3,000 flight cycles after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs first, replace the inboard actuator attach
fitting of the outboard flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
57A2443, Revision 1, dated June 23, 2014.
    (iv) If a machining defect is or is not found and the minimum
thickness of the wall is less than 0.130 inch: Before further
flight, replace the inboard actuator attach fitting of the outboard
flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June
23, 2014.
    (2) Replace the inboard actuator attach fitting of the outboard
flap, in accordance with Part 4 of the Accomplishment Instructions
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated June
23, 2014.

(l) Parts Installation Limitation

    As of the effective date of this AD, no actuator attach fitting
having P/N 65B08564-7 may be installed on any airplane unless the
inspection specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD is done prior to
installation and the applicable actions specified in paragraphs (i)
and (j) of this AD are done within the applicable times specified in
paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD. A review of airplane maintenance
records, if available, is acceptable to determine if the inspection
and applicable actions have been done, provided the inspection and
actions can be positively determined from the records review.

(m) Action for Parts Installed After AD 2013-23-03, Amendment 39-17658
(78 FR 68345, November 14, 2013) Was Accomplished

    For airplanes on which the detailed inspection required by
paragraph (h)(1) of this AD is done before the effective date of
this AD and the inboard actuator attach fitting was replaced since
that inspection: Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD,
inspect to determine the part number of the inboard actuator attach
fittings of the outboard flaps and, for inboard actuator attach
fittings having P/N 65B08564-7, do the applicable actions specified
in paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of this AD within the applicable
times specified in paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of this AD. A review
of airplane maintenance records, if available, is acceptable to
determine the part number, provided the part number can be
positively determined from the records review.

(n) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 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 manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (o) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) 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.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make
those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) If any service information contains steps that are
identified as RC (Required for Compliance), those steps must be done
to comply with this AD; any steps that are not identified as RC are
recommended. Those steps that are not identified as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in accordance with the
operator's maintenance or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC provided the steps identified as RC can be done
and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any
substitutions or changes to steps identified as RC require approval
of an AMOC.
    (5) AMOCs approved for AD 2013-23-03, Amendment 39-17658 (78 FR
68345, November 14, 2013) are approved as AMOCs for the
corresponding provisions of this AD.

(o) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Nathan Weigand,
Aerospace

Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(p) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
January 28, 2016.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, Revision 1, dated
June 23, 2014.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
November 29, 2013 (78 FR 68345, November 14, 2013).
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-57A2443, dated September
12, 2013.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (5) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (6) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (7) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 24, 2015.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-30881 Filed 12-23-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 138 (Friday, July 17, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43452-43457]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15470]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL 10012-16-OW]

40 CFR Part 35

Notice of Funding Availability for Applications for Credit
Assistance Under the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act
(WIFIA) Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of funding availability.

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

SUMMARY: In the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, signed
by the President on December 20, 2019, Congress provided $50 million in
budget authority for the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation
Act of 2014 (WIFIA) program to cover the subsidy required to provide a
much larger amount of credit assistance. The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA or the Agency) estimates that this budget authority may
provide approximately $5 billion in credit assistance and may finance
approximately $10 billion in water infrastructure investment, while
covering increased costs associated with implementing a larger program.
The purpose of this notice of funding availability (NOFA) is to solicit
letters of interest (LOIs) from prospective borrowers seeking credit
assistance from EPA.
    EPA will evaluate and select proposed projects described in the
LOIs using the selection criteria established in statute and
regulation, and further described in this NOFA as well as the WIFIA
program handbook. This NOFA establishes relative weights that will be
used in the current LOI submittal period for the selection criteria,
introduces new budgetary scoring factors to determine budgetary scoring
compliance, and outlines the process that prospective borrowers should
follow to be considered for WIFIA credit assistance.
    In addition, EPA reserves the right to make additional awards using
FY 2020 appropriated funding or available carry-over resources,
consistent with Agency policy and guidance, if additional funding is
available after the original selections are made. This could include
holding a subsequent selection round.

DATES: The LOI submittal period will begin on July 17, 2020 and end at
11:59 p.m. EDT on October 15, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Prospective borrowers should submit all LOIs electronically
via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or via EPA's SharePoint site. To be granted
access to the SharePoint site, prospective borrowers should contact
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and request a link to the SharePoint site, where they can
securely upload their LOIs. Requests to upload documents should be made
no later than 5:00 p.m. EDT on October 13, 2020.
    EPA will notify prospective borrowers that their LOI has been
received via a confirmation email.
    Prospective borrowers can access additional information, including
the WIFIA program handbook and application materials, on the WIFIA
website: https://www.epa.gov/wifia/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  For a project to be considered during a
selection round, EPA must receive a

LOI, via email or SharePoint, before the corresponding deadline listed
above. EPA is only able to accept emails of 25 MB or smaller with
unzipped attachments (EPA cannot accept zipped files). If necessary due
to size restrictions, prospective borrowers may submit attachments
separately, as long as they are received by the deadline.
    When writing a LOI, prospective borrowers are encouraged to fill
out the WIFIA LOI form and follow the guidelines contained on the WIFIA
program website: https://www.epa.gov/wifia/wifia-application-materials.
Prospective borrowers should provide the LOI and any attachments as
Microsoft Word documents or searchable PDF files, whenever possible, to
facilitate EPA's review. Additionally, prospective borrowers should
ensure that financial information, including the pro forma financial
statement, is in a formula-based Microsoft Excel document. Section VI
of this NOFA provides additional details on the LOI's content.
    EPA will invite each prospective borrower whose project proposal is
selected for continuation in the process to submit a final application.
Final applications should be received by EPA within 365 days of the
invitation to apply but EPA may extend the deadline on a case-by-case
basis if the LOI schedule signals additional time may be needed.
    EPA will host a series of webinars to provide further information
about submitting a LOI. The webinar schedule and registration
instructions can be found on the WIFIA program website: www.epa.gov/wifia.
    Prospective borrowers with questions about the program or interest
in meeting with the WIFIA program staff may send a request to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EPA will meet with all prospective borrowers interested
in discussing the program, but only prior to submission of a LOI.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Program Funding
III. Eligibility Requirements
IV. Fiscal Year 2020 Office of Management and Budget Budgetary
Scoring Determination
V. Types of Credit Assistance
VI. Letters of Interest and Applications
VII. Fees
VIII. Selection Criteria

I. Background

    Congress enacted WIFIA as part of the Water Resources Reform and
Development Act of 2014 (WRRDA). Codified at 33 U.S.C. 3901-3914, WIFIA
authorizes a federal credit program for water infrastructure projects
to be administered by EPA. WIFIA authorizes EPA to provide federal
credit assistance in the form of secured (direct) loans or loan
guarantees for eligible water infrastructure projects.
    The WIFIA program's mission is to accelerate investment in our
nation's water and wastewater infrastructure by providing long-term,
low-cost, supplemental credit assistance under customized terms to
creditworthy water infrastructure projects of national and regional
significance.

II. Program Funding

    Congress appropriated $50 million in funding to cover the subsidy
cost of providing WIFIA credit assistance. The subsidy cost covers the
Federal government's risk that the loan may not be paid back. EPA
anticipates that the average subsidy cost for WIFIA-funded projects
will be relatively low; therefore, this funding can be leveraged into a
much larger amount of credit assistance. EPA estimates that this
appropriation will allow the Agency to provide approximately $5 billion
\1\ in long-term, low-cost financing to water and wastewater
infrastructure projects and accelerate approximately $10 billion in
infrastructure investment around the country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This estimated loan volume is provided for reference only.
Consistent with the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 and the
requirements of the Office of Management and Budget, the actual
subsidy cost of providing credit assistance is based on individual
project characteristics and calculated on a project-by-project
basis. Thus, actual lending capacity may vary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Recognizing the need that exists in both small and large
communities to invest in infrastructure, Congress stipulated in statute
that EPA set aside 15 percent of the budget authority appropriated each
year for small communities, defined as systems that serve a population
of less than 25,000. Of the funds set aside, any amount not obligated
by June 1 of the fiscal year for which budget authority is set aside
may be used for any size community. Regardless of whether EPA obligates
these funds by June 1 of the fiscal year for which budget authority is
set aside, EPA will endeavor to use 15 percent of its budget authority
for small communities.
    In addition to assisting both large and small projects and
communities, WIFIA may be an attractive borrowing mechanism for a
variety of different borrower and credit types. EPA anticipates that
municipalities, private entities, project financings, State Revolving
Fund programs, and tribes will benefit from the low cost and debt
structuring flexibilities that the WIFIA loans can offer.

III. Eligibility Requirements

    The WIFIA statute and implementing rules set forth eligibility
requirements for prospective borrowers, projects, and project costs.
The requirements outlined below are described in greater detail in the
WIFIA program handbook.

A. Eligible Applicants

    Prospective borrowers must be one of the following in order to be
eligible for WIFIA credit assistance:
    (i) A corporation;
    (ii) A partnership;
    (iii) A joint venture;
    (iv) A trust;
    (v) A federal, state, or local governmental entity, agency, or
instrumentality;
    (vi) A tribal government or a consortium of tribal governments; or
    (vii) A state infrastructure financing authority.

B. Eligible Projects

    The WIFIA statute authorizes EPA to provide credit assistance for a
wide variety of projects. Projects must be one of the following in
order to be eligible for WIFIA credit assistance:
    (i) One or more activities that are eligible for assistance under
section 603(c) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.
1383(c)), notwithstanding the public ownership requirement under
paragraph (1) of that subsection;
    (ii) One or more activities described in section 1452(a)(2) of the
Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300j-12(a)(2));
    (iii) A project for enhanced energy efficiency in the operation of
a public water system or a publicly owned treatment works;
    (iv) A project for repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of a
treatment works, community water system, or aging water distribution or
waste collection facility (including a facility that serves a
population or community of an Indian reservation);
    (v) A brackish or sea water desalination project, including
chloride control, a managed aquifer recharge project, a water recycling
project, or a project to provide alternative water supplies to reduce
aquifer depletion;
    (vi) A project to prevent, reduce, or mitigate the effects of
drought, including projects that enhance the resilience of drought-
stricken watersheds;
    (vii) Acquisition of real property or an interest in real
property--

    (a) If the acquisition is integral to a project described in
paragraphs (i) through (v); or
    (b) Pursuant to an existing plan that, in the judgment of the
Administrator, would mitigate the environmental impacts of water
resources infrastructure projects otherwise eligible for assistance
under this section;
    (viii) A combination of projects, each of which is eligible under
paragraph (i) or (ii), for which a state infrastructure financing
authority submits to the Administrator a single application; or
    (ix) A combination of projects secured by a common security pledge,
each of which is eligible under paragraph (i), (ii), (iii), (iv), (v),
(vi), or (vii), for which an eligible entity, or a combination of
eligible entities, submits a single application.

C. Eligible Costs

    As defined under 33 U.S.C. 3906 and described in the WIFIA program
handbook, eligible project costs are costs associated with the
following activities:
    (i) Development-phase activities, including planning, feasibility
analysis (including any related analysis necessary to carry out an
eligible project), revenue forecasting, environmental review,
permitting, preliminary engineering and design work, and other
preconstruction activities;
    (ii) Construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, and replacement
activities;
    (iii) The acquisition of real property or an interest in real
property (including water rights, land relating to the project, and
improvements to land), environmental mitigation (including acquisitions
pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 3905(8)), construction contingencies, and
acquisition of equipment; and
    (iv) Capitalized interest necessary to meet market requirements,
reasonably required reserve funds, capital issuance expenses, and other
carrying costs during construction. Capitalized interest on WIFIA
credit assistance may not be included as an eligible project cost.

D. Threshold Requirements

    For a project to be considered for WIFIA credit assistance, a
project must meet the following five criteria:
    (i) The project and obligor shall be creditworthy;
    (ii) A project shall have eligible project costs that are
reasonably anticipated to equal or exceed $20 million, or for a project
eligible under paragraphs (2) or (3) of 33 U.S.C. 3905 serving a
community of not more than 25,000 individuals, project costs that are
reasonably anticipated to equal or exceed $5 million;
    (iii) Project financing shall be repayable, in whole or in part,
from state or local taxes, user fees, or other dedicated revenue
sources that also secure the senior project obligations of the project;
shall include a rate covenant, coverage requirement, or similar
security feature supporting the project obligations; and may have a
lien on revenues subject to any lien securing project obligations;
    (iv) In the case of a project that is undertaken by an entity that
is not a state or local government or an agency or instrumentality of a
State or local government, or a tribal government or consortium of
tribal governments, the project that the entity is undertaking shall be
publicly sponsored; and
    (v) The applicant shall have developed an operations and
maintenance plan that identifies adequate revenues to operate,
maintain, and repair the project during its useful life.

E. Federal Requirements

    All projects receiving WIFIA assistance must comply, if applicable,
with federal requirements and regulations, including (but not limited
to):
    (i) American Iron and Steel Requirement, 33 U.S.C. 3914, https://www.epa.gov/cwsrf/state-revolving-fund-american-iron-and-steel-ais-requirement;
    (ii) Labor Standards, 33 U.S.C. 1372, https://www.dol.gov/whd/govcontracts/dbra.htm;
    (iii) National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq., https://www.epa.gov/nepa;
    (iv) Floodplain Management, Executive Order 11988, 42 FR 26951, May
24, 1977, https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/11988.html;
    (v) Archeological and Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. 469-
469c, https://www.nps.gov/archeology/tools/laws/ahpa.htm;
    (vi) Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq., https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview;
    (vii) Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/about-office-water;
    (viii) Coastal Barrier Resources Act, 16 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.,
https://www.fws.gov/ecological-services/habitat-conservation/cbra/Act/index.html;
    (ix) Coastal Zone Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq., https://coast.noaa.gov/czm/about/;
    (x) Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq., https://www.fws.gov/endangered/;
    (xi) Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations, Executive Order 12898, 59 FR
7629, February 16, 1994, https://www.archives.gov/files/federal-register/executive-orders/pdf/12898.pdf;
    (xii) Protection of Wetlands, Executive Order 11990, 42 FR 26961,
May 25, 1977, as amended by Executive Order 12608, 52 FR 34617,
September 14, 1987, https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404;
    (xiii) Farmland Protection Policy Act, 7 U.S.C. 4201 et seq.,
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/?cid=nrcs143_008275;
    (xiv) Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C. 661-666c, as
amended, https://www.fws.gov/;
    (xv) Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 16
U.S.C. 1801 et seq., https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/document/magnuson-stevens-fishery-conservation-and-management-act;
    (xvi) National Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.,
https://www.nps.gov/archeology/tools/laws/NHPA.htm;
    (xvii) Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq., https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water;
    (xviii) Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq., https://rivers.gov/;
    (xix) Debarment and Suspension, Executive Order 12549, 51 FR 6370,
February 18, 1986, https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12549.html;
    (xx) Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act, 42
U.S.C. 3301 et seq., as amended, and Executive Order 12372, 47 FR
30959, July 14, 1982, http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/comm_planning;
    (xxii) New Restrictions on Lobbying, 31 U.S.C. 1352, https://www.epa.gov/grants/lobbying-and-litigation-information-federal-grants-cooperative-agreements-contracts-and-loans;
    (xxiii) Prohibitions relating to violations of the Clean Water Act
or Clean Air Act with respect to Federal contracts, grants, or loans
under 42 U.S.C. 7606 and 33 U.S.C. 1368, and Executive Order 11738, 38
FR 25161, September 12, 1973, https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/11738.html;
    (xxiv) The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property
Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, 42

U.S.C. 4601 et seq., https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2005-01-04/pdf/05-6.pdf;
    (xxv) Age Discrimination Act, 42 U.S.C. 6101 et seq., https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/adea.cfm;
    (xxvi) Equal Employment Opportunity, Executive Order 11246, 30 FR
12319, September 28, 1965, https://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/ca_11246.htm;
    (xxvii) Section 13 of the Clean Water Act, Pub. L. 92-500, codified
in 42 U.S.C. 1251, https://www.epa.gov/ocr/external-civil-rights-compliance-office-title-vi;
    (xxviii) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. 794,
supplemented by Executive Orders 11914, 41 FR 17871, April 29, 1976 and
11250, 30 FR 13003, October 13, 1965, https://www.epa.gov/ocr/external-civil-rights-compliance-office-title-vi;
    (xxix) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000d et
seq., https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/title-vi-and-environmental-justice; and
    (xxx) Participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in
Procurement under Environmental Protection Agency Financial Assistance
Agreements, 73 FR 15904, March 26, 2008, https://www.epa.gov/resources-small-businesses.
    Detailed information about some of these requirements is outlined
in the WIFIA program handbook. Further information can be found at the
links above.

IV. Fiscal Year 2020 Office of Management and Budget Budgetary Scoring
Determination

    In order to comply with Public Law 116-94, a project selected for
WIFIA financing using funding appropriated in FY 2020 will be assessed
using two initial screening questions and sixteen scoring factors.
These questions will help the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
determine compliance with budgetary scoring rules, a process that will
be conducted in parallel to EPA's LOI evaluation process outlined in
this NOFA. The questions may be found in Federal Register publication:
Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act Program (WIFIA)
Criteria Pursuant to Public Law 116-94 [85 FR 39189, June 30, 2020].
These questions are also published in the WIFIA program handbook and
further information about the scoring process may be referenced
therein. EPA encourages project applicants to review the scoring
criteria and provide sufficient information in the LOI or as an
attachment to the LOI to facilitate EPA and OMB review of the
prospective project in light of the scoring criteria. EPA may contact
prospective borrowers after the LOI is submitted if clarification is
needed to answer the budgetary scoring determination questions.

V. Types of Credit Assistance

    Under WIFIA, EPA is permitted to provide credit assistance in the
form of secured (direct) loans or loan guarantees. The maximum amount
of WIFIA credit assistance to a project is 49 percent of eligible
project costs. Each prospective borrower should list the estimated
total capital costs of the project, broken down by activity type and
differentiating between eligible project costs and ineligible project
costs in the LOI and application.

VI. Letters of Interest and Applications

    Each prospective borrower will be required to submit a LOI and, if
invited, an application to EPA in order to be considered for approval.
This section describes the LOI submission and application submission.

A. Letter of Interest

    Prospective borrowers seeking a WIFIA loan must submit a LOI
describing the project fundamentals and addressing the WIFIA selection
criteria.
    The primary purpose of the LOI is to provide adequate information
to EPA to: (i) Validate the eligibility of the prospective borrower and
the prospective project, (ii) perform a preliminary creditworthiness
assessment, (iii) perform a preliminary engineering feasibility
assessment, and (iv) evaluate the project against the selection
criteria. Based on its review of the information provided in the LOI,
EPA will invite prospective borrowers to submit applications for their
projects. Prospective borrowers are encouraged to review the WIFIA
program handbook to help create the best justification possible for the
project and a cohesive and comprehensive LOI submittal.
    Prospective borrowers are encouraged to utilize the LOI form on the
WIFIA website and ensure that sufficient detail about the project is
provided for EPA's review. EPA will notify a prospective borrower if
its project is deemed ineligible as described in Section III of this
NOFA.
    Below is guidance on what EPA recommends be included in the LOI.
    A. Key Loan Information. In this section, the prospective borrower
provides a general description of the project, purpose, loan amount,
total eligible project costs, application submission date, loan close
date, and population information. The prospective borrower also
includes information such as its legal name, address, website, Dun and
Bradstreet Data Universal Number System (DUNS) number, and employer/
taxpayer identification number.
    In the case of a project that is undertaken by an entity that is
not a state or local government or an agency or instrumentality of a
state or local government, or a tribal government or consortium of
tribal governments, the project that the entity is undertaking must be
publicly sponsored. Public sponsorship means that the prospective
borrower can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of EPA, that it has
consulted with the affected state, local, or tribal government in which
the project is located, or is otherwise affected by the project, and
that such government supports the proposed project. A prospective
borrower can show support by including a certified letter signed by the
approving state, tribal, or municipal department or similar agency;
governor, mayor or other similar designated authority; statute or local
ordinance; or any other means by which government approval can be
evidenced.
    B. Engineering and Credit. In this section, the prospective
borrower provides any technical reports or written information relevant
to evaluating the project and a high-level schedule of dates for the
project or projects included in the LOI. To evaluate creditworthiness,
the prospective borrower will provide a credit rating letter that is
less than a year old or is actively maintained. If the prospective
borrower does not have a current rating letter, the borrower should
describe how the senior obligations of the project will achieve an
investment-grade rating and provide a pro-forma and three years of
audited financial statements.
    C. Selection Criteria. In this section, the prospective borrower
describes the potential policy benefits achieved using WIFIA assistance
with respect to each of the WIFIA program selection criteria. These
criteria and their weights are enumerated in Section VIII of this NOFA
and further explained in the WIFIA program handbook.
    D. Contact Information. In this section, the prospective borrower
identifies the point of contact with whom the WIFIA program should
communicate regarding the LOI. To complete EPA's evaluation, the WIFIA
program staff may contact a prospective borrower regarding specific
information in the LOI.
    E. Certifications. In this section, the prospective borrower
certifies that it will abide by all applicable laws and

regulations, if selected to receive funding.
    F. SRF Notification. In this section, the prospective borrower
acknowledges that EPA will notify the state infrastructure financing
authority in the state in which the project is located that it
submitted a LOI and provide the submitted LOI and source documents to
that authority. The prospective borrower may opt out of having its LOI
and source documents shared.

B. Application

    After EPA concludes its evaluation of the LOIs, a selection
committee will invite prospective borrowers to apply based on the
scoring of the selection criteria, while taking into consideration
geographic and project diversity. The selection committee may choose to
combine multiple LOIs or separate projects from a prospective borrower
based on the creditworthiness review and may offer an alternative
amount of WIFIA assistance than requested in the LOI.
    An invitation to apply for WIFIA credit assistance does not
guarantee EPA's approval, which remains subject to a project's
continued eligibility, including creditworthiness, the successful
negotiation of terms acceptable to EPA, and the availability of funds
at the time at which all necessary recommendations and evaluations have
been completed. However, the purpose of EPA's LOI review is to pre-
screen prospective borrowers to the extent practicable. It is expected
that EPA will only invite projects to apply if it anticipates that
those projects are able to obtain WIFIA credit assistance. Detailed
information needs for the application are listed in the application
form and described in the WIFIA program handbook.

VII. Fees

    There is no fee to submit a LOI. The final fee rule, Fees for Water
Infrastructure Project Applications under WIFIA, 40 CFR 35.10080, was
signed by EPA on June 19, 2017, and establishes the fees related to the
provision of federal credit assistance under WIFIA. Each invited
applicant must submit, concurrent with its application, a non-
refundable Application Fee of $25,000 for projects serving communities
of not more than 25,000 individuals or $100,000 for all other projects.
Applications will not be evaluated until the Application Fee is paid.
For successful applicants, this fee will be credited toward final
payment of a Credit Processing Fee, assessed following financial close,
to reimburse EPA for actual engineering, financial, and legal costs. In
the event a final credit agreement is not executed, the borrower is
still required to reimburse EPA for the costs incurred. Borrowers may
finance these fees with WIFIA credit assistance.

VIII. Selection Criteria

    This section specifies the criteria and process that EPA will use
to evaluate LOIs and award applications for WIFIA assistance.
    The selection criteria described below incorporate statutory
eligibility requirements, supplemented by the WIFIA regulations at 40
CFR 35.10055. EPA has also identified the following strategic
objectives as priorities for this LOI submittal period:
    (i) Readiness to proceed: In order to ensure the efficient use of
limited federal resources for infrastructure finance, a project's
readiness to proceed toward development, including loan closing and the
commencement of construction, is an Agency priority.
    (ii) Provide for clean and safe drinking water: EPA is working to
strengthen its implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act to ensure
we protect and build upon the enormous public health benefits achieved
through the provision of safe drinking water throughout the country.
One of the Agency's highest priorities include reducing exposure to
lead and addressing emerging contaminants, including per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), in the nation's drinking water
systems.
    (iii) Repair, rehabilitate, and replace aging infrastructure and
conveyance systems: Many communities face formidable challenges in
providing adequate and reliable water and wastewater infrastructure
services. Existing water and wastewater infrastructure in some of these
communities is aging, and investment is not always keeping up with the
needs. EPA estimates the national funding need for capital improvements
for such facilities totals approximately $740 billion over the next 20
years. In many cases, meeting these needs will require significant
increases in capital investment.
    (iv) Water reuse and recycling: EPA is highlighting water reuse and
recycling as a new or innovative approach. EPA recognizes that reuse
and recycling of water can play a critical role in helping states,
tribes, and communities meet their future drinking water needs with a
diversified portfolio of water sources. The practice can alleviate the
effects of drought and assure groundwater resource sustainability and a
secure water supply.
    EPA's priorities reflect water sector challenges that require
innovative tools to assist municipalities in managing and adapting to
our most pressing public health and environmental challenges. These
priorities are reflected in the scoring methodology of the selection
criteria below, described in greater detail in the WIFIA program
handbook.
    The WIFIA selection criteria are divided into three categories that
represent critical considerations for selecting projects: Project
Impact, Project Readiness, and Borrower Creditworthiness. Each
criterion within a category can provide a range of points with the
maximum number of points indicated. Each category can provide up to 100
points out of a total of 300 available points, and the category-
specific and overall scores will help inform the selection committee's
deliberations within the overall WIFIA framework. For the Project
Readiness and Borrower Creditworthiness categories, criteria scores are
supplemented by points awarded from the preliminary engineering
feasibility analysis and preliminary creditworthiness assessment,
respectively, described in the WIFIA program handbook. In order to
reflect EPA's priorities and give greater consideration to a class of
projects that reduce exposure to lead and address emerging
contaminants, including PFAS, in the nation's drinking water systems,
EPA has added a criterion (ix) to the Project Impact category of
criteria in accordance with 40 CFR 35.10055(b). The criteria are as
follows:
Project Impact
    (i) 15 points: The extent to which the project is nationally or
regionally significant, with respect to the generation of economic and
public benefits, such as (1) the reduction of flood risk; (2) the
improvement of water quality and quantity, including aquifer recharge;
(3) the protection of drinking water, including source water
protection; and (4) the support of international commerce. 33 U.S.C.
3907(b)(2)(A); 40 CFR 35.10055(a)(1).
    (ii) 5 points: The extent to which the project (1) protects against
extreme weather events, such as floods or hurricanes; or (2) helps
maintain or protect the environment: 33 U.S.C. 3907(b)(2)(F); 40 CFR
35.10055(a)(4); 40 CFR 35.10055(a)(5).
    (iii) 5 points: The extent to which the project serves regions with
significant energy exploration, development, or production areas: 33
U.S.C. 3907(b)(2)(G); 40 CFR 35.10055(a)(6).
    (iv) 10 points: The extent to which a project serves regions with
significant

water resource challenges, including the need to address: (1) Water
quality concerns in areas of regional, national, or international
significance; (2) water quantity concerns related to groundwater,
surface water, or other water sources; (3) significant flood risk; (4)
water resource challenges identified in existing regional, state, or
multistate agreements; or (5) water resources with exceptional
recreational value or ecological importance. 33 U.S.C. 3907(b)(2)(H);
40 CFR 35.10055(a)(7).
    (v) 10 points: The extent to which the project addresses identified
municipal, state, or regional priorities. 33 U.S.C. 3907(b)(2)(I); 40
CFR 35.10055(a)(8).
    (vi) 25 points: The extent to which the project addresses needs for
repair, rehabilitation or replacement of a treatment works, community
water system, or aging water distribution or wastewater collection
system. 40 CFR 35.10055(a)(12).
    (vii) 10 points: The extent to which the project serves
economically stressed communities, or pockets of economically stressed
rate payers within otherwise non-economically stressed communities. 40
CFR 35.10055(a)(13).
    (viii) 20 points: The extent to which the project reduces exposure
to lead in the nation's drinking water systems or addresses emergent
contaminants. 40 CFR 35.10055(b).
Project Readiness
    (i) 50 points: The readiness of the project to proceed toward
development, including a demonstration by the obligor that there is a
reasonable expectation that the contracting process for construction of
the project can commence by not later than 90 days after the date on
which a federal credit instrument is obligated for the project under
[WIFIA]. 33 U.S.C. 3907(b)(2)(J); 40 CFR 35.10055(a)(9).
    (ii) 30 points: Preliminary engineering feasibility analysis score.
33 U.S.C. 3907(a)(2); 33 U.S.C. 3907(a)(6); 40 CFR 35.10015(c); 40 CFR
35.10045(a).
    (iii) 20 points: The extent to which the project uses new or
innovative approaches. 33 U.S.C. 3907(b)(2)(D); 40 CFR 35.10055(a)(3).
Borrower Creditworthiness
    (i) 10 points: The likelihood that assistance under [WIFIA] would
enable the project to proceed at an earlier date than the project would
otherwise be able to proceed. 33 U.S.C. 3907(b)(2)(C); 40 CFR
35.10055(a)(2).
    (ii) 10 points: The extent to which the project financing plan
includes public or private financing in addition to assistance under
[WIFIA]. 33 U.S.C. 3907(b)(2)(B); 40 CFR 35.10055(a)(10).
    (iii) 10 points: The extent to which assistance under [WIFIA]
reduces the contribution of Federal assistance to the project. 33
U.S.C. 3907(b)(2)(K); 40 CFR 35.10055(a)(11).
    (iv) 10 points: The amount of budget authority required to fund the
Federal credit instrument made available under [WIFIA]. 33 U.S.C.
3907(b)(2)(E).
    (v) 60 points: Preliminary creditworthiness assessment score. 33
U.S.C. 3907(a)(1); 40 CFR 35.10015(c); 40 CFR 35.10045(a)(1); 40 CFR
35.10045(a)(4); 40 CFR 35.10045(b).
    In addition to the selection criteria score, EPA is required by 33
U.S.C. 3902(a) to ``ensure a diversity of project types and
geographical locations.''
    Following analysis by the WIFIA program staff, a final score is
calculated for each project. Projects will be selected in order of
score, subject to the requirement to ensure a diversity of project
types and geographical locations. To ensure diversity, EPA will
establish a ceiling for each project type and geographical location.
EPA will select projects in rank order up until the point that the
ceiling is reached. Thereafter, the next highest project that adds
diversity will be selected.
    The scoring scales and guidance used to evaluate each project
against the selection criteria are available in the WIFIA program
handbook. Prospective borrowers considering WIFIA should review the
WIFIA program handbook and discuss how the project addresses each of
the selection criteria in the LOI submission.

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 3901-3914; 40 CFR part 35.

Andrew Wheeler,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020-15470 Filed 7-16-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P