[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 129 (Thursday, July 5, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39797-39798]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16456]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-PHMSA-2012-0137]

Pipeline Safety: Information Collection Activities

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, PHMSA
invites comments on a new information collection (IC) to help determine
the effectiveness of PHMSA's 811 Public Service Announcement (PSA)
campaign. In calendar year 2012, as part of a campaign to raise
awareness of 811 as the national ``Call Before You Dig'' toll-free
telephone number, PHMSA produced a 30-second video PSA, a 30-second
radio PSA and a 60-second radio PSA. All were produced in both English
and Spanish and are available in several formats for downloading and
broadcasting. PHMSA seeks to measure the effectiveness of the campaign
through an online survey. After the comments to this notice are
addressed, PHMSA will request approval for this new information
collection from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before
September 4, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted in the following ways:
    E-Gov Web Site: http://www.regulations.gov. This site allows the
public to enter comments on any Federal Register notice issued by any
agency.
    Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., West Building, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the ground level of the U.S. DOT,
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Identify the docket number, PHMSA-2012-0137, at the
beginning of your comments. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. You should know that anyone is able to
search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our
dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). Therefore, you may want to review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000, (65 FR 19477) or visit http://www.regulations.gov
before submitting any such comments.
    Docket: For access to the docket or to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to Room W12-
140 on the ground level of the U.S. DOT, West Building, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. If you wish to receive confirmation of
receipt of your written comments, please include a self-addressed,
stamped postcard with the following statement: ``Comments on PHMSA-
2012-0137.'' The Docket Clerk will date stamp the postcard prior to
returning it to you via the U.S. mail. Please note that due to delays
in the delivery of U.S. mail to Federal offices in Washington, DC, we
recommend that persons consider an alternative method (internet, fax,
or professional delivery service) of submitting comments to the docket
and ensuring their timely receipt at DOT.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Angela Dow by telephone at 202-366-
1246, by fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by mail at U.S. DOT, PHMSA, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., PHP-30, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 1320.8(d), Title 5, Code of Federal
Regulations requires PHMSA to provide interested members of the public
and affected agencies an opportunity to comment on information
collection and recordkeeping requests. This notice identifies a new
information collection request that PHMSA will submit to OMB for
approval. The information collection will be titled: ``U.S. Department
of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration 811 Awareness Survey.'' This information collection will
provide the data necessary to measure the effectiveness of the PHMSA
811 PSA campaign. Excavation damage to pipelines is a leading cause of
serious incidents involving fatalities and injuries. A call to 811 is
the first step in preventing such incidents and PHMSA seeks to increase
awareness of this critical safety message to reduce the number of
damages to pipelines. Target audiences for the PSA include the general
public and small professional excavators. The survey is designed to
measure awareness of the importance of calling 811 before beginning an
excavation project and the extent to which the PSA influences that
awareness and planned behavior. The results of this survey will help
shape future PHMSA 811 outreach and educational efforts. PHMSA is
proposing an online form for this information collection. A copy of the
survey has been placed in the docket and is available for comment. The
following information is provided for

this information collection: (1) Title of the information collection;
(2) OMB control number; (3) Type of request; (4) Abstract of the
information collection activity; (5) Description of affected public;
(6) Estimate of total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden; and
(7) Frequency of collection. PHMSA will request a three-year term of
approval for this information collection activity.
    PHMSA requests comments on the following information collection:
    Title: U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration 811 Awareness Survey.
    OMB Control Number: Pending.
    Type of Request: New information collection.
    Abstract: PHMSA is conducting a survey of awareness of 811 as the
national ``Call Before You Dig'' toll-free telephone number, the
importance of calling 811 before beginning an excavation project and
the extent to which the newly released PHMSA PSA is effective in
raising awareness about this topic. This data is necessary to measure
the effectiveness of the PSA campaign and plan future educational and
outreach efforts.
    Affected Public: All.
    Estimated number of responses: 1,000.
    Estimated annual burden hours: 120.
    Frequency of collection: One time collection.
    Comments are invited on:
    (a) The need for the proposed collection of information for the
proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether
the information will have practical utility;
    (b) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
    (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
    (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 27, 2012.
Jeffrey D. Wiese,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2012-16456 Filed 7-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register: December 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 233)]
[Notices]
[Page 64124-64125]
[DOCID:fr07de09-945]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-1999-6480; FMCSA-2001-11426; FMCSA-
2001-10578; FMCSA-2002-12844; FMCSA-2003-15268; FMCSA-2003-15892;
FMCSA-2005-21711; FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2007-27897]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
27 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals
from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent
to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained without the
exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective December 27, 2009. Comments must be
received on or before January 6, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-1999-6480;
FMCSA-2001-11426; FMCSA-2001-10578; FMCSA-2002-12844; FMCSA-2003-15268;
FMCSA-2003-15892; FMCSA-2005-21711; FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2007-27897,
using any of the following methods.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
for this Notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without
change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476). This information is
also available at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64-224, Washington,
DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 27 individuals who have requested a renewal
of their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 27 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

Grady L. Black, Jr.,
Anthony Brandano,
Stanley E. Elliott,
Elmer E. Gockley,
Glenn T. Hehner,
Wayne H. Holt,
Edward E. Hooker,
Vladimir M. Kats,
Alfred Keehn,
Martin D. Keough,
Randall B. Laminack,
Norman R. Lamy,
Robert W. Lantis,
James A. Lenhart,
Jerry J. Lord,
Raymond P. Madron,
Ronald S. Mallory,
Eldon Miles,
Jack E. Potts, Jr.,
Neal A. Richard,
John E. Rogstad,
Robert E. Sanders,
Steven R. Smith,
Robert L. Thies,
Rene R. Trachsel,
Kendle F. Waggle, Jr.,
DeWayne Washington.

    These exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual has a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), and
(b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is otherwise
physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each individual
provides a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the
medical examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (3)
that each individual provides a copy of the annual medical
certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file and retain a copy of the certification on his/her
person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized Federal,
State, or local enforcement official. Each exemption will be valid for
two years unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be
rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower
level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3)
continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals
and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 27 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (64 FR 27027; 64 FR 51568; 66 FR 48504; 68 FR 54775; 70 FR
53412; 72 FR 222; 66 FR 63289; 68 FR 64944; 70 FR 71993; 64 FR 68195;
65 FR 20251; 67 FR 10471; 67 FR 19798; 69 FR 19611; 66 FR 53826; 66 FR
66966; 68 FR 69434; 70 FR 74102; 67 FR 68719; 68 FR 2629; 70 FR 7545;
68 FR 37197; 68 FR 48989; 70 FR 42615; 72 FR 64273; 68 FR 52811; 68 FR
61860; 70 FR 61165; 72 FR 58359; 70 FR 48797; 70 FR 61493; 70 FR 57353;
70 FR 72689; 72 FR 39885; 72 FR 52419). Each of these 27 applicants has
requested renewal of the exemption and has submitted evidence showing
that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the standard
specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision impairment is
stable. In addition, a review of each record of safety while driving
with the respective vision deficiencies over the past two years
indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision exemption
standards. These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each
driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate commerce.
Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for each
renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a
level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by January 6, 2010.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 27 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was based on the merits of each
case and only after careful consideration of the comments received to
its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all of these drivers, are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

    Issued on: November 25, 2009.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E9-29114 Filed 12-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 130 (Friday, July 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31592-31594]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14467]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83567; File No. SR-CBOE-2018-047]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating
to the Penny Pilot Program

June 29, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, \2\ notice is hereby given
that on June 26, 2018, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe
Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to extend the operation of Penny Pilot
Program through December 31, 2018. The text of the proposed rule change
is provided below.

(additions are in italics; deletions are [bracketed])
* * * * *

Cboe Exchange, Inc.

Rules

* * * * *

Rule 6.42. Minimum Increments for Bids and Offers

    The Board of Directors may establish minimum increments for options
traded on the Exchange. When the Board of Directors determines to
change the minimum increments, the Exchange will designate such change
as a stated policy, practice, or interpretation with respect to the
administration of Rule 6.42 within the meaning of subparagraph (3)(A)
of subsection 19(b) of the Exchange Act and will file a rule change for
effectiveness upon filing with the Commission. Until such time as the
Board of Directors makes a change to the minimum increments, the
following minimum increments shall apply to options traded on the
Exchange:
    (1) (No change).
    (2) (No change).
    (3) The decimal increments for bids and offers for all series of
the option classes participating in the Penny Pilot Program are: $0.01
for all option series quoted below $3 (including LEAPS), and $0.05 for
all option series $3 and above (including LEAPS). For QQQQs, IWM, and
SPY, the minimum increment is $0.01 for all option series. The Exchange
may replace any option class participating in the Penny Pilot Program
that has been delisted with the next most actively-traded, multiply-
listed option class, based on national average daily volume in the
preceding six calendar months that is not yet included in the Pilot
Program. Any replacement class would be added on the second trading day
following [January 1, 2018] July 1, 2018. The Penny Pilot shall expire
on [June 30, 2018] December 31, 2018.
    (4) (No change).

. . . Interpretations and Policies:

    .01-.04 (No change).
* * * * *
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for

the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Penny Pilot Program (the ``Pilot Program'') is scheduled to
expire on June 30, 2018. The Exchange proposes to extend the Pilot
Program until December 31, 2018. The Exchange believes that extending
the Pilot Program will allow for further analysis of the Pilot Program
and a determination of how the Pilot Program should be structured in
the future.
    During this extension of the Pilot Program, the Exchange proposes
that it may replace any option class that is currently included in the
Pilot Program and that has been delisted with the next most actively
traded, multiply listed option class that is not yet participating in
the Pilot Program (``replacement class''). Any replacement class would
be determined based on national average daily volume in the preceding
six months,\5\ and would be added on the second trading day following
July 1, 2018. The Exchange will employ the same parameters to
prospective replacement classes as approved and applicable in
determining the existing classes in the Pilot Program, including
excluding high-priced underlying securities.\6\ The Exchange will
announce to its Trading Permit Holders by circular any replacement
classes in the Pilot Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The month immediately preceding a replacement class's
addition to the Pilot Program (i.e., June) would not be used for
purposes of the six-month analysis. Thus, a replacement class to be
added on the second trading day following July 1, 2018 would be
identified based on The Option Clearing Corporation's trading volume
data from December 1, 2017 through May 31, 2018.
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 60864 (October 22,
2009), 74 FR 55876 (October 29, 2009) (SR-CBOE-2009-76).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is specifically authorized to act jointly with the
other options exchanges participating in the Pilot Program in
identifying any replacement class. The Exchange lastly represents that
the Exchange has the necessary system capacity to continue to support
operation of the Penny Pilot.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\7\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \8\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitation
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \9\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers. In particular, the proposed rule change allows for
an extension of the Pilot Program for the benefit of market
participants. The Exchange notes that this proposal does not propose
any new policies or provisions that are unique or unproven, but instead
relates to the continuation of an existing program that operates on a
pilot basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Specifically, the Exchange
believes that, by extending the expiration of the Pilot Program, the
proposed rule change will allow for further analysis of the Pilot
Program and a determination of how the Program shall be structured in
the future. In doing so, the proposed rule change will also serve to
promote regulatory clarity and consistency, thereby reducing burdens on
the marketplace and facilitating investor protection. In addition, the
Exchange has been authorized to act jointly in extending the Pilot
Program and believes the other exchanges will be filing similar
extensions.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\11\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
thereunder.
    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \12\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing.\13\ However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\14\ the
Commission may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the proposal may become operative immediately upon filing. The
Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest
because doing so will allow the Pilot Program to continue without
interruption in a manner that is consistent with the Commission's prior
approval of the extension and expansion of the Pilot Program and will
allow the Exchange and the Commission additional time to analyze the
impact of

the Pilot Program.\15\ Accordingly, the Commission designates the
proposed rule change as operative upon filing with the Commission.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change along with a
brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this pre-filing requirement.
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \15\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61061 (November 24,
2009), 74 FR 62857 (December 1, 2009) (SR-NYSEArca-2009-44).
    \16\ For purposes only of waiving the operative delay for this
proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact
on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \17\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2018-047 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2018-047 This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2018-047 and should be submitted on
or before July 27, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-14467 Filed 7-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 67)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 16154-16160]
[DOCID:fr09ap09-16]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0083; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-266-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model EMB-135BJ, -135ER, -135KE, -135KL, -135LR, -145, -
145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP, and -145EP Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM); reopening of
comment period.

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

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier NPRM for the products listed above.
This action revises the earlier NPRM by expanding the scope. This
proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to
identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The
MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    It has been found the occurrence of engine anti-ice system valve
failure, where the valve spring seat has broken and obstructed the
anti-ice system venturi tube. Therefore, should the aircraft
encounter icing conditions, ice may accrete in the engine inlet lip
and be ingested through the air inlet, resulting in possible engine
damage and flame-out.

    The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address
the unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 4, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Empresa

Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), Technical Publications
Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170--Putim--12227-901
Sa[atilde]o Jose dos Campos--SP--BRASIL; telephone: +55 12 3927-5852 or
+55 12 3309-0732; fax: +55 12 3927-7546; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: http://www.flyembraer.com. You may
review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1405; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2007-0083;
Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-266-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 with an earlier NPRM for the
specified products, which was published in the Federal Register on
October 25, 2007 (72 FR 60595). That earlier NPRM proposed to require
actions intended to address the unsafe condition for the products
listed above.
    Since the earlier NPRM was issued, we have determined that the
procedures specified in paragraphs (f)(5)(ii), (f)(6)(i), (f)(6)(ii),
(f)(7), and (f)(8) of the earlier NPRM need to be revised for the
reasons cited in our response to the comment submitted by American
Eagle Airlines below. The earlier NPRM corresponds to Brazilian
Airworthiness Directive 2006-09-03R1, effective January 4, 2007
(referred to after this as ``the MCAI''). The MCAI describes procedures
for inspecting the engine anti-icing system valves and tubes to detect
damage and, if necessary, replacing the anti-icing system valves. You
may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    We have considered the following comments received on the earlier
NPRM.

Request To Clarify if Earlier NPRM Will be Delayed Due to a Malfunction
Related to Part Number (P/N) C146009-4

    American Eagle Airlines, Inc. states that it has experienced
malfunctions of the engine anti-ice valve (EAIV) P/N C146009-4
installed during accomplishment of Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-
0044, Revision 03, dated December 12, 2006; and Embraer Service
Bulletin 145-30-0049, Revision 01, dated October 19, 2006. These
service bulletins are cited in the earlier NPRM as appropriate sources
of service information for replacing the EAIV. The commenter asks if
implementing the earlier NPRM will be delayed until the current
problems with the P/N C146009-4 valve are identified and corrected.
    We have determined that the reported malfunctions and failure of
the EAIV P/N C146009-4 are due to piston rib breakage found in the EAIV
(P/N C146009-2/-3 reworked to C146009-4) reworked in accordance with
one of the service bulletins in the following table.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Embraer Service Bulletin                  Revision                               Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
145-30-0044............................  Original..................  October 31, 2005.
145-30-0044............................  01........................  June 26, 2006.
145-30-0044............................  02........................  September 25, 2006.
145-30-0044............................  03........................  December 12, 2006.
145LEG-30-0018.........................  Original..................  June 26, 2006.
145LEG-30-0018.........................  01........................  September 25, 2006.
145LEG-30-0018.........................  02........................  December 12, 2006.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-30-0018, Revision 02, dated
December 12, 2006, is also cited in the earlier NPRM as an appropriate
source of service information for replacing the anti-ice valve.
    We have determined that the piston rib failure mode of P/N C146009-
4 is not related to the unsafe condition addressed by this supplemental
NPRM. EMBRAER has stated that the new failure mode has no effect on
safety because there is an engine indicating and crew alerting system
(EICAS) message related to the event. There is no indication that this
failure could lead to engine anti-ice system clogging and the final
effect of this failure mode is to maintain the EAIV in ``open''
position, therefore maintaining unobstructed bleed air for engine anti-
icing. We have not changed this supplemental NPRM in this regard.
    However, EMBRAER has issued Service Bulletins 145-30-0044, Revision
04, dated May 14, 2008; and 145LEG-30-0018, Revision 03, dated May 14,
2008. The latest revisions of these service bulletins contain
essentially the same procedures as the previous issues, except these
service bulletins include revisions to the referenced Hamilton
Sundstrand/Microtecnica procedures for upgrading the EAIV P/N C146009-
2/-3 to P/N C146009-4 by including dye-penetrant inspections of the
piston. We have revised paragraphs (f)(5)(i), (f)(6)(ii), (f)(7),
(f)(8), and (f)(9) of the supplemental NPRM to refer to Embraer Service
Bulletins 145-30-0044, Revision 04, dated May 14, 2008; and

145LEG-30-0018, Revision 03, dated May 14, 2008.
    Also, EMBRAER has released Service Newsletter (SNL) 145-30-0021,
dated May 26, 2008, informing the operators about the new failure mode
and its effect on P/N C146009-4. EMBRAER and ANAC have stated that they
will continue monitoring the occurrence reports related to the failure
of P/N C146009-4. If additional data are presented that would justify
additional actions, we might consider further rulemaking on this issue.
We have not changed this supplemental NPRM in this regard.

Request to Correct Service Information Citation

    EMBRAER and ExpressJet request that we correct an error in
paragraph (f)(5)(ii) of the earlier NPRM. EMBRAER states that, rather
than: ``If the valve was installed according to the detailed
instructions and procedures described in Embraer Service Bulletin 145-
30-0044, Revision 03, dated December 12, 2006,'' this sentence should
cite the original issue of the service information: Embraer Service
Bulletin 145-30-0044, dated October 31, 2005. ExpressJet also states
that we should revise the service information citation as described,
but adds that we should also refer to Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-
0044, Revision 01, dated June 26, 2006, in paragraph (f)(5)(ii) of the
earlier NPRM.
    We agree with the requests to correct the service information
citation. However, since Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0044, Revision
01, includes the special detailed inspections for removing any damage
or obstruction of the anti-ice tubes, only Embraer Service Bulletin
145-30-0044, dated October 31, 2005, should be cited in paragraph
(f)(5)(ii) of the supplemental NPRM. We have revised paragraph
(f)(5)(ii) of the supplemental NPRM accordingly. For the same reasons,
we also revised paragraph (f)(6)(i) of the supplemental NPRM to cite
Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0044, dated October 31, 2005.

Request to Allow Records Check

    ExpressJet requests that we revise paragraph (f)(1) of the earlier
NPRM to allow an aircraft records review to determine the valve part
number. ExpressJet states that, except for 10 airplanes, its fleet has
been retrofitted to replace EAIV P/Ns C146009-2 and C146009-3 with P/N
C146009-4 valves. ExpressJet asserts that the locations of those valves
that have not been replaced can be easily determined from an aircraft
records review and that requiring a general visual inspection (GVI) of
valves to determine their part numbers would be redundant and a waste
of resources.
    We disagree with this request. In order to ensure the correct
configuration of EAIV part numbers are installed on the airplanes so
that appropriate actions required by this AD are followed, we require a
visual inspection of the part number, as specified in the MCAI, to
determine if the valve is installed. However, as provided by paragraph
(g)(1) of the AD, operators may request an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) if data are submitted to demonstrate that using a
records review would provide an acceptable level of safety.

Request to Clarify Valve Replacement

    ExpressJet requests that we clarify the valve replacement
requirements described in paragraphs (f)(3) and (f)(4) of the earlier
NPRM. ExpressJet asserts that replacing a P/N C146009-2 or C146009-3
valve with a valve having either of those P/Ns rather than a P/N
C146009-4 valve will lead to excessive tracking and inspection
requirements. ExpressJet states that this will constitute an enormous
burden on operators and make it impossible or very difficult to meet
certain documentation and tracking requirements of section 121.380
(a)(2)(i) of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 121.380
(a)(2)(i)).
    We acknowledge ExpressJet's statement that replacement with a P/N
C146009-2 or C146009-3 valve leads to additional tracking and
inspection requirements. However, we disagree that this will constitute
an enormous burden on operators because replacing EAIV P/N C146009-2 or
C146009-3 with a valve having either of those P/Ns rather than a P/N
C146009-4 valve is an option. Although this option is more labor
intensive, it will address the unsafe condition as required by the
supplemental NPRM. Eventually operators would be required to replace P/
N C146009-2 and C146009-3 valves with new P/N C146009-4 valves as
specified in paragraphs (f)(7) and (f)(8) of the supplemental NPRM. We
have not changed this supplemental NPRM in this regard.

Request to Allow Alternative Parts

    Dukes, Inc., requests that we revise the earlier NPRM to permit the
use of parts manufacturer approval (PMA) parts. The commenter states
that in 2003 it designed, tested, and manufactured an approved PMA
alternative valve (Dukes P/N 5460-00-1) to replace the P/N C146009-2
valve. The commenter states that this PMA valve is currently in
operation in the field and that the PMA valve design is not subject to
the failure mode described in the earlier NPRM. Further, the commenter
asserts that subsequent upgrades developed for P/N C146009-2 and -3
valves do not affect the form, fit, or function of the PMA valve. The
commenter asserts that the reduced cost and shorter lead-time for the
PMA valve would be of great benefit to operators. The commenter
requests that we permit the use of the described PMA valves as
replacements for P/N C146009-4 as well as P/N C146009-3 valves.
    We do not agree with the request to allow the use of Dukes P/N
5460-00-1 as a replacement for P/Ns C146009-3 and C146009-4. The PMA
request to allow Dukes P/N 5460-00-1 as a replacement for P/N C146009-4
as well as P/N C146009-3 valves has not been approved yet. However, as
provided by paragraph (g)(1) of the AD, any person may request an AMOC
if data are submitted to demonstrate that using a different replacement
part would provide an acceptable level of safety. We have not changed
this supplemental NPRM in this regard.

Request to Clarify Terminating Action

    ExpressJet requests that we clarify that the actions specified in
paragraph (f)(5)(ii) of the earlier NPRM are considered terminating
action. ExpressJet states that it is clear that the actions described
in paragraph (f)(5)(i) of the earlier NPRM are terminating actions.
ExpressJet asserts, therefore, that after the inspection specified in
paragraph (f)(5)(ii) is done, no further action is required because the
installation and inspection specified in paragraph (f)(5)(ii) of the
earlier NPRM is equivalent to the installation specified in paragraph
(f)(5)(i). ExpressJet states that the action in paragraph (f)(5)(ii) of
the earlier NPRM would also qualify as an exception to the minimum
equipment list (MEL) requirement specified in paragraph (f)(6) of the
earlier NPRM.
    We acknowledge ExpressJet's comments regarding clarifying paragraph
(f)(5)(ii) of the earlier NPRM. We have revised paragraph (f)(5)(ii) of
the supplemental NPRM to include the following statement: After doing
the actions specified in paragraph (f)(5)(ii) of this AD, no further
action is required by this AD.
    We have revised paragraph (f)(6)(i) of the supplemental NPRM to add
Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0044, dated October 31, 2005. In
addition, we have revised paragraph (f)(6)(ii) of the supplemental NPRM
to add Embraer Service Bulletins 145-30-0044, Revision 01, dated June
26, 2006;

Revision 02, dated September 25, 2006; Revision 03, dated December 12,
2006; and Revision 04, dated May 14, 2008. Therefore, the MEL exception
will be in accordance with paragraph (f)(6)(i) and (f)(6)(ii) of the
supplemental NPRM.

Request to Address Parts Installed as Replacements

    ExpressJet requests that we revise paragraph (f)(5)(ii) of the
earlier NPRM to address parts installed as replacements in accordance
with service information other than the service bulletins specified in
paragraph (f)(5)(ii).
    We agree with the request to address service information other than
the service bulletins specified in paragraph (f)(5)(ii) of the
supplemental NPRM. We have received reports of clogging of venturi
tubes when parts were replaced in accordance with the airplane
maintenance manual or illustrated parts catalog. We have determined
that parts that were installed in accordance with a method other than
those specified in paragraph (f)(5)(i) of this AD must be inspected. We
have revised paragraph (f)(5)(ii) of this AD accordingly.

Request to Revise Costs of Compliance

    Dukes, Inc., requests that we revise the Costs of Compliance
paragraph in the earlier NPRM. The commenter states that the cost to
modify P/N C146009-2 or -3 valves to the -4 configuration will be in
excess of $20,000 per valve.
    We agree with the commenter. There are approximately 306 P/N
C146009-2 and -3 valves (305 C146009-2 valves and 1 C146009-3 valve)
that need to be replaced with P/N C146009-4 valves. The part would cost
about $27,507 (the cost to modify the part is up to $23,444) and it
would take about 5 work-hours to install. We have revised the Costs of
Compliance paragraph in this supplemental NPRM accordingly. However,
since certain parts of the P/N C146009-2 and -3 valve assemblies are
re-workable, Hamilton Sundstrand and Microtechnica state that they have
established commercial programs that reduce the cost substantially for
the parts returned for modification.

Request to Review Additional Information on Earlier NPRM

    Dukes, Inc., requests that we provide them with any additional
information that was submitted after the comment period closed
(November 26, 2007) for the earlier NPRM. Dukes states that it is aware
that additional information may have been presented by a third party.
    As stated earlier, we have received and reviewed new service
information from EMBRAER. No additional information other than what is
contained in the docket has been submitted. We are not aware of any ex
parte contacts that occurred during the rulemaking process. You may
examine the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov;
or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section of the supplemental NPRM. You may also review copies
of the referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or
425-227-1152.

Revisions to the Supplemental NPRM to Allow Compliance With Certain
Service Bulletins

    In the earlier NPRM, we inadvertently did not include references to
the original issue of Embraer Service Bulletins 145-30-0049 and 145LEG-
30-0016, both dated June 28, 2006, in paragraphs (f)(1)(ii), (f)(2),
(f)(3), (f)(4), (f)(5)(ii), and (f)(6) of the earlier NPRM. These
service bulletins are acceptable sources of service information for
doing the actions specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(ii), (f)(2), (f)(3),
(f)(4), (f)(5)(ii), and (f)(6) of the earlier NPRM. In order to
correspond with the MCAI, we have revised paragraphs (f)(1)(ii),
(f)(2), (f)(3), (f)(4), (f)(5)(ii), and (f)(6) of this supplemental
NPRM to refer to Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0049, dated June 28,
2006; and Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-30-0016, dated June 28, 2006.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.
    Certain changes described above expand the scope of the earlier
NPRM. As a result, we have determined that it is necessary to reopen
the comment period to provide additional opportunity for the public to
comment on this proposed AD.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 697 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 7 work-hours per product to comply with the
requirements of this proposed AD. Required parts would cost up to
$55,014 per product (for airplanes having two affected parts; there are
306 affected parts). Where the service information lists required parts
costs that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will
be no charge for these costs. As we do not control warranty coverage
for affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than
estimated here. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Based on
these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S.
operators to be up to $8,807,433 or up to $55,574 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have Federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Empresa Brasileira De Aeronautica S.A. (Embraer): Docket No. FAA-
2007-0083; Directorate Identifier 2006-NM-266-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by May 4, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model EMB-135BJ, -135ER, -135KE, -135KL, -135LR, -145, -
145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP, and -145EP airplanes,
certificated in any category, except airplanes having serial numbers
14500921, 14500928, 14500932, 14500949, 14500958, 14500971, 14500973
and up, which will have in-factory modification incorporated.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America Code 30: Ice and Rain
Protection.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    It has been found the occurrence of engine anti-ice system valve
failure, where the valve spring seat has broken and obstructed the
anti-ice system venturi tube. Aircraft dispatch with that failure
may be allowed by the operator Minimum Equipment List (MEL), since
the engine anti-ice system valve be locked in the OPEN position.
However, there is no readily available means to make sure the anti-
ice system tubing is free of debris, allowing unrestricted hot
airflow to the piccolo tube on the engine inlet lip. Therefore,
should the aircraft encounter icing conditions, ice may accrete in
the engine inlet lip and be ingested through the air inlet,
resulting in possible engine damage and flame-out.

    The required actions include an inspection to determine the part
number of the engine anti-icing system valves; repetitive
inspections of certain engine anti-icing system valves and tubes to
detect damage, and replacement of the valves if damage is found; and
eventual replacement of certain anti-icing system valves.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) PART I--Within the next 500 flight hours or 3 months after
the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, carry out a
general visual inspection of both LH (left-hand) and RH (right-hand)
engine anti-ice system valves to determine their P/N (part number).
    (i) If any engine anti-ice system valve with P/N C146009-2 is
found, no further action is required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD.
    (ii) If any anti-ice system valve with P/N C146009-3 is found,
before further flight: Remove it and carry out a detailed inspection
regarding its integrity; and carry out a special detailed inspection
for an obstruction in the corresponding engine anti-ice system
tubes; according to the detailed instructions and procedures
described in Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0049, dated June 28,
2006, or Revision 01, dated October 19, 2006; or Embraer Service
Bulletin 145LEG-30-0016, dated June 28, 2006, or Revision 01, dated
February 5, 2007; as applicable.
    (A) If the valve is damaged or the tube is obstructed, before
further flight: Replace the valve with a serviceable or new valve
bearing P/N C146009-2, C146009-3, or C146009-4; or remove the
obstruction; as applicable; in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0049, dated June 28,
2006, or Revision 01, dated October 19, 2006; or Embraer Service
Bulletin 145LEG-30-0016, dated June 28, 2006, or Revision 01, dated
February 5, 2007; as applicable.
    (B) If the valve is not damaged or the tube is not obstructed,
re-install the valve or install a serviceable or new valve bearing
P/N C146009-2, C146009-3, or C146009-4; or re-install the tube; in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Embraer Service
Bulletin 145-30-0049, dated June 28, 2006, or Revision 01, dated
October 19, 2006; or Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-30-0016, dated
June 28, 2006, or Revision 01, dated February 5, 2007; as
applicable.
    (iii) If any engine anti-ice system valve with P/N C146009-4 is
found, no further action is required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD.
In this case, paragraphs (f)(2), (f)(3), (f)(4), (f)(7), and (f)(8)
of this AD are not applicable. However, paragraphs (f)(5) and (f)(6)
of this AD must be accomplished.
    (2) PART II--Within the next 1,500 flight hours or 9 months
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, and
thereafter at intervals that do not exceed 1,000 flight hours or 6
months, whichever occurs first, carry out a detailed inspection for
damage of both LH and RH engine anti-ice system valves bearing P/N
C146009-2 or C146009-3; and a special detailed inspection for
obstruction of the corresponding engine anti-ice system tubes;
according to the detailed instructions and procedures described in
Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0049, dated June 28, 2006, or
Revision 01, dated October 19, 2006; or Embraer Service Bulletin
145LEG-30-0016, dated June 28, 2006, or Revision 01, dated February
5, 2007; as applicable; and accomplish paragraphs (f)(2)(i) and
(f)(2)(ii) of this AD, as applicable.
    (i) If the valve is damaged or the tube is obstructed, before
further flight: Replace the valve with a serviceable or new valve
bearing P/N C146009-2, C146009-3, or C146009-4; or remove the
obstruction; as applicable; in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0049, dated June 28,
2006, or Revision 01, dated October 19, 2006; or Embraer Service
Bulletin 145LEG-30-0016, dated June 28, 2006, or Revision 01, dated
February 5, 2007; as applicable.
    (ii) If the valve is not damaged, or the tube is not obstructed,
before further flight: Re-install the valve or install a serviceable
or new valve bearing P/N C146009-2, C146009-3, or C146009-4; or
remove the obstruction; as applicable; in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0049,
dated June 28, 2006, or Revision 01, dated October 19, 2006; or
Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-30-0016, dated June 28, 2006, or
Revision 01, dated February 5, 2007; as applicable.
    (3) PART III--Any engine anti-ice system valve with P/N C146009-
2 or C146009-3 that will be installed as a replacement as provided
for in paragraph (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD, must undergo a
detailed inspection for its integrity before installation, and any
damage or obstruction repaired, according to the detailed
instructions and procedures described in Embraer Service Bulletin
145-30-0049, dated June 28, 2006, or Revision 01, dated October 19,
2006; or Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-30-0016, dated June 28,
2006, or Revision 01, dated February 5, 2007; as applicable; and
additionally adhere to paragraphs (f)(3)(i) and (f)(3)(ii) of this
AD, as applicable.
    (i) If the valve is damaged, replace it with a serviceable or
new valve bearing P/N C146009-2, C146009-3, or C146009-4; in
accordance with the Accomplishment

Instructions of Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0049, dated June 28,
2006, or Revision 01, dated October 19, 2006; or Embraer Service
Bulletin 145LEG-30-0016, dated June 28, 2006, or Revision 01, dated
February 5, 2007; as applicable.
    (ii) If the valve is not damaged, installation is permitted.
    (4) PART IV--Any engine anti-ice system tubes that will be
installed on the airplane as a replacement as provided for in
paragraph (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD, must undergo a special
detailed inspection before installation, and any damage or
obstruction repaired, according to the detailed instructions and
procedures described in Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0049, dated
June 28, 2006, or Revision 01, dated October 19, 2006; or Embraer
Service Bulletin 145LEG-30-0016, dated June 28, 2006, or Revision
01, dated February 5, 2007; as applicable.
    (5) PART V--If any engine anti-ice system valve with P/N
C146009-4 has been found during the inspection required by paragraph
(f)(1) of this AD, do paragraphs (f)(5)(i) or (f)(5)(ii) of this AD,
as applicable, within the next 1,500 flight hours or 9 months after
the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first.
    (i) If the valve was installed according to the detailed
instructions and procedures described in Embraer Service Bulletin
145-30-0044, Revision 01, dated June 26, 2006, Revision 02, dated
September 25, 2006, Revision 03, dated December 12, 2006, or
Revision 04, dated May 14, 2008; or Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-
30-0018, Revision 02, dated December 12, 2006, or Revision 03, dated
May 14, 2008; as applicable; no further action is required by this
AD.
    (ii) If the valve was installed according to detailed
instructions and procedures other than those specified in paragraph
(f)(5)(i) of this AD; carry out a special detailed inspection in the
corresponding engine anti-ice system tubes, and repair all damage
and remove all obstructions; according to the detailed instructions
and procedures described in Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0049,
dated June 28, 2006, or Revision 01, dated October 19, 2006; or
Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-30-0016, dated June 28, 2006, or
Revision 01, dated February 5, 2007; as applicable. After doing the
actions specified in paragraph (f)(5)(ii) of this AD, no further
action is required by this AD.
    (6) PART VI--Before aircraft dispatch with one or two engine
anti-ice system valves inoperative (Master Minimum Equipment List
(MMEL) 30-21-01), carry out a detailed inspection for damage of the
affected engine anti-ice system valves; and a special detailed
inspection for obstruction of the corresponding engine anti-ice
system tubes; and repair any damage or obstruction before further
flight. Do all actions according to the detailed instructions and
procedures described in Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0049, dated
June 28, 2006, or Revision 01, dated October 19, 2006; or Embraer
Service Bulletin 145LEG-30-0016, dated June 28, 2006, or Revision
01, dated February 5, 2007; as applicable; by accomplishing
paragraph (f)(2) of this AD, unless:
    (i) Valves with P/N C146009-4 have been previously installed
according to the detailed instructions and procedures described in
Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0044, dated October 31, 2005;
Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-30-0018, dated June 26, 2006; or
Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-30-0018, Revision 01, dated
September 25, 2006; as applicable; and additionally, paragraph
(f)(5)(ii) of this AD has been accomplished; or
    (ii) Valves with P/N C146009-4 have been previously installed
according to the detailed instructions and procedures described in
Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0044, Revision 01, dated June 26,
2006, Revision 02, dated September 25, 2006, Revision 03, dated
December 12, 2006, or Revision 04, dated May 14, 2008; or Embraer
Service Bulletin 145LEG-30-0018, Revision 02, dated December 12,
2006, or Revision 03, dated May 14, 2008; as applicable.
    (7) PART VII--Within the next 2,500 flight hours or 12 months
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, install
engine anti-ice system valves bearing P/N C146009-4 in the LH and RH
engine positions, replacing P/N C146009-3, according to the detailed
instructions and procedures described in Embraer Service Bulletin
145-30-0044, Revision 01, dated June 26, 2006, Revision 02, dated
September 25, 2006, Revision 03, dated December 12, 2006, or
Revision 04, dated May 14, 2008; or Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-
30-0018, Revision 02, dated December 12, 2006, or Revision 03, dated
May 14, 2008; as applicable.
    (8) PART VIII--Within the next 6,000 flight hours or 30 months
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, install
engine anti-ice system valves bearing P/N C146009-4 in the LH and RH
engine positions, replacing P/N C146009-2, according to the detailed
instructions and procedures described in Embraer Service Bulletin
145-30-0044, Revision 01, dated June 26, 2006; Revision 02, dated
September 25, 2006, Revision 03, dated December 12, 2006, or
Revision 04, dated May 14, 2008; or Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-
30-0018, Revision 02, dated December 12, 2006, or Revision 03, dated
May 14, 2008; as applicable.
    (9) PART IX--The installation of engine anti-ice system valves
bearing P/N C146009-4 according to the detailed instructions and
procedures described in Embraer Service Bulletin 145-30-0044,
Revision 01, dated June 26, 2006, Revision 02, dated September 25,
2006, Revision 03, dated December 12, 2006; or Revision 04, dated
May 14, 2008; or Embraer Service Bulletin 145LEG-30-0018, Revision
02, dated December 12, 2006, or Revision 03, dated May 14, 2008; as
applicable; constitutes a terminating action for this AD, in lieu of
the repetitive inspections required by paragraph (f)(2) of this AD.

    Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a general visual inspection
is: ``A visual examination of an interior or exterior area,
installation, or assembly to detect obvious damage, failure, or
irregularity. This level of inspection is made from within touching
distance unless otherwise specified. A mirror may be necessary to
ensure visual access to all surfaces in the inspection area. This
level of inspection is made under normally available lighting
conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, flashlight, or
droplight and may require removal or opening of access panels or
doors. Stands, ladders, or platforms may be required to gain
proximity to the area being checked.''

    Note 2:  For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is:
``An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or
assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available
lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as
mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface cleaning
and elaborate procedures may be required.''

    Note 3: For the purposes of this AD, a special detailed
inspection is: ``An intensive examination of a specific item,
installation, or assembly to detect damage, failure, or
irregularity. The examination is likely to make extensive use of
specialized inspection techniques and/or equipment. Intricate
cleaning and substantial access or disassembly procedure may be
required.''

FAA AD Differences

    Note 4: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, ANM-
116, International Branch, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, has
the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Sanjay
Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies,
notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal
avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a principal
inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information
collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-
0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2006-09-03R1,
effective January 4, 2007; and to the service bulletins listed in
Table 1 of this AD; for related information.

                                       Table 1--Related Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Embraer Service Bulletin--                Revision--                            Dated--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
145-30-0044............................  01........................  June 26, 2006.
145-30-0044............................  02........................  September 25, 2006.
145-30-0044............................  03........................  December 12, 2006.
145-30-0044............................  04........................  May 14, 2008.
145-30-0049............................  Original..................  June 28, 2006.
145-30-0049............................  01........................  October 19, 2006.
145LEG-30-0016.........................  Original..................  June 28, 2006.
145LEG-30-0016.........................  01........................  February 5, 2007.
145LEG-30-0018.........................  02........................  December 12, 2006.
145LEG-30-0018.........................  03........................  May 14, 2008.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on March 30, 2009.
Stephen P. Boyd,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E9-8082 Filed 4-8-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Materials Characterization Paper

In Support of the

Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking –

Identification of Nonhazardous Materials That Are Solid Waste

Biomass - Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues

December 17, 2008

====================================================================

1.	Definitions of Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues

The forest products industry generates large amounts of residual biomass
as timber is harvested and manufactured into marketable goods such as
lumber and paper. Forest derived biomass may originate directly from the
forest (logging residues) or from timber processing mills (primary mill
residues). Logging residues include tree tops and small branches that
are typically left uncollected during logging operations. Primary mill
residues consist of bark residues, coarse residues such as chunks and
slabs, and fine residues such as shavings and sawdust generated at
sawmills that process harvested timber. Other forest derived biomass
produced by this industry include residues from woodworking shops,
furniture factories, and truss and pallet manufacturing (secondary mill
residues). These materials have typically been used for their fuel value
in paper operations, as well as disposed of in landfills.

Another source of biomass fuels from the forest products industry is
pulp and paper residuals, including black liquor and wastewater
treatment sludges. Black liquor is generated in the kraft process, which
in 2000 accounted for 83 percent of domestic pulp production. Black
liquor consists of lignin and pulping chemicals used to separate lignin
from the cellulosic fraction of wood. Sludges, both primary and
secondary, are produced from wastewater treatment of process effluents.
Primary sludges originate from primary wastewater treatment operations
(i.e., sedimentation or primary clarification operations) and consist of
wood fiber and inorganic materials, while secondary sludges come from
secondary / biological treatment operations and are composed largely of
microbial biomass.  Note that use of sludges associated with municipal
wastewater treatment (i.e., sewage treatment) plants as fuel is
addressed in a separate paper.

2.	Annual Quantities of Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper
Residues Generated and Used

Sectors that Generate Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper
Residues:

NAICS 113310: Logging

NAICS 3221: Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills

NAICS 32111: Sawmills and Wood Preservation

NAICS 32121: Veneer, Plywood, and Engineered Wood Product Manufacturing

Quantities and Prices of Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper
Residues Generated:

Perlack et al. (2005) estimated production of logging and other removal
residues at 67.1 million tons, 41.9 million tons of which is available
for recovery. This is consistent with Milbrandt (2005), who estimated
total production at 62.4 million tons. McKeever (2004) estimated total
production at 103 million tons with 92.6 million tons available for
recovery. Unlike the other two studies, McKeever included 17.6 million
tons of stumps and limbs. Each of these three studies was derived from
the USDA Forest Service’s Timber Product Output Database.

Total primary mill residue production ranges from 86.8 to 91.4 million
tons (McKeever 2004, Perlack et al. 2005, Milbrandt 2005).

Pulp and paper mills produce the dry biomass equivalent of 52.1 million
tons of black liquor (Perlack et al. 2005) and between 4.2 and 5.8
million tons of wastewater treatment sludges (ITC 2002, Thacker 2007).

Gan (2007) estimates for forest residue a median total market price
(including transport) of $40 per dry ton with a range from $36 to $45.
Current prices for primary mill residues are undetermined, although
there is evidence to suggest that prices have increased substantially in
recent years (e.g., sawdust priced at $25 a ton in 2006 to over $100 per
ton in some markets in 2008) (Millman 2008).

No established commercial market for black liquor exists as it is
utilized within pulp and paper mills.  Prices for sludges are
undetermined.

Trends in Generation of Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper
Residues:

Domestic primary mill residue production decreased from 113.4 million
tons in 1990 to 83.4 million tons in 2002 (McKeever 1999, Smith et al.
2004).

Domestic pulp and paperboard capacity decreased at an average annual
rate of 0.7 percent for the period from 2000 to 2007 (AF&PA 2008).

US timber harvest is expected to increase 24 percent by 2050 according
to the Fifth Resources Planning Act Timber Assessment (Haynes and Skog
2002). This increase will be exclusively in the harvest of nonsawtimber
trees.

Perlack et al. (2005) predict that by 2050 increases in availability of
logging and other removal residues by 23 million tons, pulping liquors
by 22 million tons, and primary and secondary mill residues by 16
million tons. An additional 60 million tons of forest biomass may also
be available should widespread fuel treatments for reducing fire hazards
be implemented.

3.	Uses of Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues

Combustion Uses of Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues:

Logging residues, as defined by the Timber Product Output Database, are
not currently collected for combustion or non-combustion use.

Primary mill residues tend to be clean, uniform, concentrated, and with
a low-moisture content (Perlack et al. 2005). They are, therefore,
highly desirable as a fuel as well as for other purposes. Currently,
only between 1.7 and 1.9 million tons are unused (McKeever 2004, Perlack
et al. 2005, Milbrandt 2005).

Approximately 42 percent of all primary mill residues are used as fuel,
including 76 percent of bark residues, 12 percent of coarse residues,
and 56 percent of fine residues (Smith et al. 2004).

Essentially all black liquors produced in pulp and paper operations are
combusted as fuel in pulping liquor recovery furnaces.  These furnaces
provide process energy and recover pulping agents (e.g., sodium sulfide)
used to form fresh cooking liquor (Perlack et al. 2005, Carrott and
Carrott 2007).

In 2002, 21.9 percent of pulp and paper mill sludges were combusted as
fuel (Thacker 2007). An undetermined fraction of sludges was used as a
cement kiln feedstock and as a fuel pellet ingredient.

It has been estimated that thermal oxidation of paper sludge can
supplement as much as 11 to 34 percent of fossil fuel demand for a
medium size mill.  (CANMET Energy Technology Centre 2005.)

Non-Combustion Uses of Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper
Residues:

Logging residues left on harvested timberland help control erosion,
replenish nutrients, and maintain soil productivity. It is unknown what
fraction can be removed without disrupting these benefits, and this is
likely to vary by location.

Around 56 percent of primary mill residues are used for non-combustion
purposes. This includes 20 percent of bark residues, used largely for
shredded mulches, and 78 percent and 23 percent of coarse and fine
residues, respectively, used for woodpulp, nonstructural panels, and
animal bedding (McKeever 2004, Smith et al. 2004). The specific uses are
driven by economic considerations.

In 2002, 14.6 percent of pulp and paper mill wastewater treatment
sludges were applied to land as a soil conditioner, fertilizer, liming
agent, or mulch (Sippola et al. 2003, Thacker 2007). Around 11.7 percent
had other beneficial uses, including as papermaking fiber, industrial
absorbent, animal bedding, manufactured soil component, compost
feedstock, landfill barrier cover (Zule et al. 2007), acid mine drainage
control cover, building board/fixture (Scott et al. 2000), glass or
lightweight aggregate, and brick or concrete additive (Naik 2004,
Thacker 2007). Sludges are also being considered as a feedstock for
ethanol production (Fan and Lynd 2007).

Quantities of Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues
landfilled:

Of the residues described in this section, only pulp and paper mill
wastewater treatment sludges are landfilled to any appreciable extent.

In 2002, approximately 51.8 percent of sludges were disposed of in
landfills or lagoons, typically onsite (Thacker 2007, ITC 2002).  There
is a trend toward reduced disposal of sludges in landfills largely due
to higher landfilling prices and higher fossil fuel prices (Mahmood and
Elliott 2006, de Alda 2008).

Quantities of Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues
Stockpiled/Stored:

The amount of logging residues that is uncollected is unknown, and these
tend to undergo rapid decomposition after timber harvest.

Black liquors are cycled through pulp and paper mills on a continuous
basis.

Stockpiled/stored quantities of primary mill residues and pulp and paper
mill wastewater treatment sludges are undetermined.

Exhibit 1:  Overview of Generation and Use of Forest Derived Biomass and
Pulp and Paper Residues

Commodity	Annual Quantity Generated 	Annual Quantity Used as Fuel	Annual
Quantity Landfilled	Annual Quantity in Other Uses	Total Quantity
Stockpiled as of 2007

Cement Kilns	Other

--------------- Million Tons ---------------

Logging Residues	41.9 – 92.6 	0 	0	0	0	0

Primary Mill Residues	86.8 – 91.4 	N/I 	35.3 	0	46.4	N/I

Black Liquor	 52.1	0 	52.1	0	0	0

Sludges	4.2 – 5.8	N/I	0.9 – 1.3	2.2 – 3.0	1.1 – 1.5	N/I

N/I =  not idetified

4.	Management and Combustion Processes for Forest Derived Biomass and
Pulp and Paper Residues

Types of Units Using Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues
as a Fuel:

Forest derived biomass are used as a fuel in a variety of boilers
including Dutch ovens, fuel cell ovens, spreader stokers,
suspension-fired boilers, and fluidized bed combustion boilers (EPA
2003). Scrap wood may be co-fired with other fuels, primarily coal (Mann
and Spath 2001).

In the kraft pulping process, black liquor is combusted as a fuel in a
pulping liquor recovery furnace. Sludges may be combusted as a fuel in
hog fuel boilers, as a supplementary fuel, or in fluidized bed boilers
(Sell 1992).

Sourcing of Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues:

Logging and primary milling residues are generated during timber harvest
and milling operations.

Black liquor is spent cooking liquor from the kraft pulping process (EPA
1995). Sludges originate from wastewater treatment and, in the case of
mills utilizing discarded paper sources, de-inking processes.

Processing of Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues:

Logging and primary milling residues may be chipped or sorted before
combustion so that they can be efficiently burned as fuel. They may also
be dried (cured).

Black liquor undergoes a series of concentrating steps before being
combusted as a fuel.  Weak black liquor is first concentrated to about
55 percent solids by a multiple-effect evaporator system, and then to
around 65 percent by a direct-contact evaporator or indirect-contact
concentrator (EPA 1995, EPA 2002).

Pulp and paper mill sludges typically undergo mechanical dewatering
before being combusted as fuel, with minimum solids content of around 40
percent needed for sustained combustion (Sell 1992, Caputo and Pelagagge
2001). Some sludges are dried to 70 to 95 percent solids (Thacker 2007).

State Status of Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues Use
as Fuel:

According to state responses to a 2006 survey by the Association of
State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO 2007),
Iowa and Mississippi have approved the use of pulp and paper residue as
fuel rather than as a waste.  This use in these states has a
pre-approved status, suggesting that a case-by-case approval process for
designation of beneficial use is not necessary for this use (ASTSWMO
2007, p.B-25).  In addition, Michigan reports that in at least one
instance the use of pulp and paper residues as fuel has been approved as
a beneficial use.

As of September 2006, approximately 50 percent of states had renewable
fuels portfolio standards requiring that varying percentages of power
generated within the individual states come from alternative fuels
(including biomass) by a designated future date; several more states
have enacted such regulations since then (DOE 2006).

5.	Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues Composition and
Impacts

Composition of Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues:

The heating values of forest derived biomass and pulp and paper residues
depend upon moisture content.

The heating value for dry (0 percent moisture) woody materials is
typically between 15.5 and 16.4 million btu/ton (7,750 to 8,200 btu/lb)
(Wright et al. 2006). Wood fired in the lumber and pulp and paper
industries has an average moisture content of 50 percent, with a heating
value of between 9 and 10 million btu/ton (4,500 to 4,980 btu/lb) (EPA
2003, EIA 2008).

The average heating value of dry black liquor is 11.8 million btu/ton
(5,880 btu/lb) (EPA 1995), with a range of 11.6 to 13.4 million btu/ton
(5,820 to 6,680 btu/lb) (Niemelä and Alén 1999). The heating value of
hydrated black liquor as enters the recovery boiler tends to be 20 to 25
percent less (i.e., average 9.1 million btu/ton (4,560 btu/lb) with a
range of 9.0 to 10.4 million btu/ton (4,510 to 5,180 btu/lb)) (Niemelä
and Alén 1999).

A mixture of primary and secondary sludges as generated by the pulp and
paper industry may have a heating value of 3.6 million btu/ton (1,810
btu/lb) at 63 percent moisture (Tarnawski 2004). Sell (1999) and EIA
(2008) describe an average sludge heating value of unknown moisture
content of 12.0 and 7.5 million btu/ton (6,000 and 3,760 btu/lb),
respectively.

Emissions Impacts of Using Forest Derived Biomass and Black Liquor as a
Fuel:

To evaluate the environmental impacts of burning forest derived biomass,
we examined the emissions associated with burning wood in a boiler and
compared these values to the emissions associated with the combustion of
conventional fossil fuels, as summarized in Exhibit 2.  The estimates in
the exhibit suggest that the combustion of wood results in higher PM
emissions than natural gas or distillate oil, but lower PM emissions
than coal or residual oil systems. Therefore, they fall within the range
of typical fuels. The data in Exhibit 2 also suggest that wood results
in lower SO2 emissions than most conventional fuels.  The estimated NOx
emissions associated with wood combustion are similar to those
associated with distillate and lower than the NOx emissions for other
conventional fuels.

Combustion of black liquor as a fuel in a recovery boiler with an
electrostatic precipitator yields 0.2 lbs. particulate matter per MMBtu.
Combustion without pollution controls emits vastly higher particulate
matter, ranging upwards of 15 lbs./MMBtu. Regardless of pollution
controls employed, SO2 emissions equal 0.6 lbs./MMBtu, while CO
emissions are 0.9 lbs./MMBtu. (EPA 1995, p.10.2-5)

	Lifecycle Emissions Impacts: Use of forest derived biomass as a
replacement for traditional primary fuels may eliminate the
environmental impacts associated with extraction and processing of
traditional fuels.  In addition to the emissions impacts of combustion
described above, Exhibit 2 lists the quantities of the total
cradle-to-gate emissions for these fuels based on typical processes in
the United States in the late 1990s, with wood scrap combustion
presented as an indicator of the emissions likely from the combustion of
wood debris.  Note that there may be impacts associated with the
processing of wood debris into useable fuel that are not accounted for
in the values presented in Exhibit 2.  In addition, there may be
alternative uses (e.g., mulching) that are environmentally preferable to
combustion.

  Exhibit 2:  Comparative Impacts of Wood Combustion versus Alternative
Primary Fuels

Pollutant	Wood	Coal	Distillate Fuel Oil	Residual Fuel Oil	Natural Gas

	Combustion	Combustion	Combustion plus Upstream	Combustion	Combustion
plus Upstream	Combustion	Combustion plus Upstream	Combustion	Combustion
plus Upstream

	----------------------------- lb./MMBtu ---------------------------

Criteria Pollutants

PM2.5	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-

PM10	0.019	0.054	0.054	0.011	0.011	0.093	0.093	0.009	0.009

PM, unspecified	-	-	0.246	-	0.012	-	0.012	-	0.004

NOx	0.167	0.482	0.504	0.173	0.234	0.367	0.428	0.301	0.417

VOCs	-	0.006	0.014	0.001	0.363	0.002	0.367	0.009	0.524

SOx	0.008	1.446	1.469	0.209	0.394	1.593	1.781	0.073	1.985

CO	1.511	0.068	0.085	0.036	0.082	0.033	0.079	0.058	0.282

Pb	1.33x10-4	8.93x10-6	9.19x10-6	4.60x10-6	5.61x10-6	5.80x10-5	5.90x10-5
-	2.72x10-7

Hg	-	2.05x10-6	2.14x10-6	1.58x10-6	1.77x10-6	8.67x10-6	8.85x10-6	-
7.18x10-8

Source:

Franklin Associates 1998.

Note:

“-” signifies data not available; may equal zero.

The emission information presented in this table is derived from Life
Cycle Inventory (LCI) data, as compiled by Franklin Associates.   LCI
data identifies and quantifies resource inputs, energy requirements, and
releases to the air, water, and land for each step in the manufacture of
a product or process, from the extraction of the raw materials to
ultimate disposal. The LCI can be used to identify those system
components or life cycle steps that are the main contributors to
environmental burdens such as energy use, solid waste, and atmospheric
and waterborne emissions.  Uncertainty in an LCI is due to the
cumulative effects of input uncertainties and data variability.

There are several life cycle inventory databases available in the U.S.
and Europe.  For this paper, we applied the most readily available LCI
database that was most consistent with the materials and uses examined.
These LCI data rely on system boundaries as defined by Franklin
Associates, as described in the documentation for this database,
available at:   HYPERLINK
"http://www.pre.nl/download/manuals/DatabaseManualFranklinUS98.pdf"
http://www.pre.nl/download/manuals/DatabaseManualFranklinUS98.pdf .

References

AF&PA. 2008, 48th Annual Survey of Paper, Paperboard, and Pulp Capacity
(American Forest & Paper Association, Washington, DC).

ASTSWMO. 2007, ASTSWMO 2006 Beneficial Use Survey Report (Association of
State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials, Washington, DC).

Biomass Energy Resource Center. “Emissions and Air Quality,”
Available at: http://www.biomasscenter.org/information/emissions.html

CANMET Energy Technology Centre.  2005, Pulp and Paper Sludge to Energy
– Preliminary Assessment of Technologies,  (34) 0173-479.1.

Caputo AC, Pelagagge PM. 2001, Waste-to-energy plant for paper industry
sludges disposal: Technical-economic study. J Haz Mat B81: 265-283.

Carrott, PJM, Carrott MML. 2007, Lignin – From natural adsorbent to
activated carbon: A review. Bioresource Technol 98: 2301-2312.

de Alda JAGO. 2008, Feasibility of recycling pulp and paper mill sludge
in the paper and board industries. Resources, Conservation and Recycling
52: 965-972.

Fan Z, Lynd LR, 2007, Conversion of paper sludge to ethanol, II: Process
design and economic analysis. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 30: 35-45.

Franklin Associates.  1998, “Franklin US LCI 98 Library”.

Gan J. 2007, Supply of biomass, bioenergy, and carbon mitigation: Method
and application. Energy Policy 35: 6003-6009.

Haynes RW, Skog KE. 2002, The Fifth Resources Planning Act Timber
Assessment: A critical tool for sound stewardship. J Forestry 100: 8-12.

Mahmood T, Elliott A. 2006, A review of secondary sludge reduction
technologies for the pulp and paper industry. Water Res 40: 2093-2112.

Mann MK, Spath PL. 2001, A life cycle assessment of biomass cofiring in
a coal-fired power plant. Clean Prod Processes 3: 81-91.

McKeever DB. 1999, Changes in the US Solid Waste Wood Resource, 1990 to
1998 (Forest Products Laboratory, USDA Forest Service, Madison, WI).

McKeever DB. 2004, Inventories of Woody Residues and Solid Wood Waste in
the United States, 2002 (Forest Products Laboratory, USDA Forest
Service, Madison, WI).

Milbrandt A. 2005, A Geographic Perspective on the Current Biomass
Resource Availability in the United States (NREL/TP-560-39181, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO).

Millman J. 2008, Sawdust Shock: A Shortage Looms as Economy Slows. The
Wall Street Journal, March 3, 2008.

Naik TR, Friberg TS, Chun Y. 2004, Use of pulp and paper mill residual
solids in production of cellucrete. Cement and Concrete Research 34:
1229-1234.

Niemelä K, Alén R. 1999, Characterization of pulping liquors. In
Analytical Methods in Wood Chemistry, Pulping and Papermaking, Sjostrom
E, Alén R, Sjostrom E, Eds. Springer-Verlag, New York. 316 pp.

Perlack RL, et al. 2005, Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and
Bioproducts Industry: The Technical Feasibility of a Billion-Ton Annual
Supply (ORNL/TM-2005/66, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN).

Pokhrel D, Viraraghavan T. 2004, Treatment of pulp and paper mill
wastewater – A review. Sci Total Environ 333: 37-58.

Scott CT, Simonsen J, Klingenberg D, Zauscher S. 2000, Beneficial Use of
Pulp and Paper Industry Residuals: Extrusion for the Manufacture of
Building Panels (Tech. Bull. No. 814, National Council for Air and
Stream Improvement).

Sell NJ. 1992, Industrial Pollution Control: Issues and Techniques. 2nd
Ed. Wiley, John & Sons, Inc. 420 pp.

Sippola J, Mäkelä-Kurtto R, Rantala P-R. 2003, Effects of composted
pulp and paper industry wastewater treatment residuals on soil
properties and cereal yield. Compost Science & Utilization 11: 228-237.

Smith WB, Miles PD, Vissage JS, Pugh SA. 2004, Forest Resources of the
United States, 2002 (USDA Forest Service, St. Paul, MN).

Thacker B. 2007, Management of Byproduct Solids Generated in the Pulp
and Paper Industry (NCASI, Presentation to US EPA OSW Staff, Washington
DC, January 23, 2007).

Tarnawski, W. 2004, Emission factors for combustion of biomass fuels in
the pulp and paper mills. Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe 12: 91-95.

US International Trade Commission (ITC). 2002, Industry & Trade Summary:
Wood Pulp and Waste Paper (USITC Publication 3490, Office of Industries,
Washington, DC).

United States Department of Energy (DOE).  2006, Biomass Energy Data
Book:  Edition 1, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USDOA,
ORNL/TM-2006-571, Table 3.16 (US Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN)

United States Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2008, Renewable
Energy Annual, 2006 (Energy Information Administration, US Dept. of
Energy, Washington, DC).

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1995, 10.2 –
Chemical Wood Pulping in AP 42, Fifth Edition, Volume I (US
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC).

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2002, Profile of
the Pulp and Paper Industry, 2nd Edition (EPA/310-R-02-002, Office of
Compliance, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC).

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2003, 1.6 – Wood
Residue Combustion in Boilers in AP 42, Fifth Edition, Volume I (US
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC).

Wright L, Boundy B, Perlack B, Davis S, Saulsbury B. 2006, Biomass
Energy Data Book: Edition 1 (ORNL/TM-2006/571, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN).

Zule J, Černec F, Likon M. 2007. Chemical properties and
biodegradability of waste paper mill sludges to be used for landfill
covering. Waste Manage Res 25: 538-546.

 Other materials are sometimes identified as Forest Product Industry
(FPI)-derived fuels in the literature;  these include wood products
found in bales of cardboard (old cardboard container, or OCC, rejects),
turpentine and derivatives, biogases recovered from industrial waste
water treatment systems or landfills, methanol from strippers, and
“tall oil” from pine processing.  These are not discussed in detail
here for a variety of reasons.  In some cases (e.g., biogases and
turpentine) they are included in other discussions.  In other cases, it
is not clear whether the materials are already considered part of
another material (e.g., OCC rejects) or are used as fuel with any
frequency (e.g., tall oil).

 Biomass production estimates are presented on an annual basis.

 The summary table in the reference does not always specify which types
of biomass are included, however, it is likely that woody biomass is
included.  For example, Nevada specifies “wood”.

 Also called the gross or higher heating value.

 We note that the emission factors for wood presented in Exhibit 2
represent averages for wood-burning boilers.  In addition, the wood
reflected in the emissions data may include wood other than forest
derived biomass.

Biomass - Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues

 PAGE

 PAGE   2

Biomass - Forest Derived Biomass and Pulp and Paper Residues

 PAGE   7