FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 1 of 37 Coal Mining ( 40 CFR 434) Detailed Investigation for 2004/ 2005 Planning Process Executive Summary During the Screening Level Review phase of the 2004/ 2005 planning process, coal mining was one of eight industrial categories identified solely through Factor 4 concerns. Issues driving the concerns include: 1) stormwater runoff, 2) high discharges of total dissolved solids ( TDS) and total suspended solids ( TSS), and 3) manganese discharges. Based on information reported to the Toxic Release Inventory ( TRI) and the Permit Compliance System ( PCS), toxic discharges from coal mining operations are low relative to other industrial categories. In addition, a few facilities generally drive the toxic weighted pound equivalent ( TWPE) loading estimates for this industry. The pollutants driving the TWPE estimate for these few facilities are mercury and arsenic.

The information in the record at this time does not support a decision to revise these effluent guidelines. In the event that stakeholders provide additional data and supporting information during subsequent review cycles, EPA will reevaluate them at that time. In the absence of revisions to the effluent guidelines, these concerns could be addressed through improved information dissemination and outreach. This could include a fact sheet with answers to frequently asked questions ( FAQs), including the names of current contacts within EPA's Office of Water. The Agency could announce the availability of this fact sheet at the regular meetings for permit writers and pretreatment coordinators held by the Office of Wastewater Management ( OWM) and through internet postings and email alerts to the Engineering and Analysis Division ( EAD) stakeholders mailing list. In addition, EPA could alert stakeholders to two available CDROMS with implementation information ( prepared jointly by EPA and Interior's Office of Surface Mining). It could also alert stakeholders to the Acid Drainage Technology Initiative, and its parent organization, The International Network for Acid Prevention, which have useful resources available, some of which are included in the public record for this planning process. Finally, due to the relatively small number of facilities discharging the bulk of the TWPE, EPA could also provide assistance to permit writers in preparing BPJ based permits.

Overview This report presents information for the following topics: Background Industry and Related Subcategories Wastewater Characteristics and Pollutant Sources Pollutants Discharged Treatment Technology and Pollution Prevention Concerns Identified Pre Proposal FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 2 of 37 Concerns Identified in Comments to Proposal Followup Contacts Possible Solutions Attachments provide the following supporting information: EPA Databases and References Used in this Review Point Source Categories Identified Solely Through Factor 4 Guidelines Applicability and Regulatory History PCS Discharges TRI Discharges Reported Pollutant Loadings The Occurence of Selenium in the Upper Kanawha Formation of the Pennsylvanian System in the Southern West Virginia Coal Fields West Virginia's Manganese Relief Protocol Background In preparation for proposing the Preliminary Effluent Guidelines Program Plan for 2004/ 2005 (" Preliminary Plan," published in February 2004), EPA analyzed four factors identified in the draft " National Strategy for Industrial Clean Water"( Edocket OW 2003 0074 0215). See Attachment A for more background about the 304( m) planning Process. The four factors focus on: 1 Potential impacts to human health and the environment. Preliminary results are summarized in the " Factor 1 Analysis: Human Health and Environmental Impacts   Status of Screening Level Review Phase" ( Edocket OW 2003 0074 0410). 2 Identification of an applicable and demonstrated technology, process change, or pollution prevention alternative that can effectively reduce pollutants discharged. Preliminary results are summarized in the " Factor 2 Analysis: Technology Advances and Process Changes   Status of Screening Level Review Phase." ( Edocket OW 2003 0074 0287). 3 Evaluation of the cost, performance, and affordability of the technology, process change, or pollution prevention measures identified using the second factor. 4 Implementation and efficiency concerns. Preliminary results are presented in the " Factor 4 Analysis: Implementation and Efficiency Considerations   Status of Screening Level Review Phase" ( Edocket OW 2003 0074 0329)

When all of the results were integrated prior to proposing the Preliminary Plan, EPA determined that 8 point source categories with existing effluent guidelines had been identified solely through Factor 4 concerns. ( See list in the Attachment B.) In order to determine the best course of action to address these concerns, EPA performed an analysis of issues and potential solutions for each of the 8 categories. The results of that analysis for Coal Mining are presented in this report. No specific subcategories were identified during the Factor 4 analysis. FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 3 of 37 Industry and Related Subcategories The Coal Mining point source category is regulated at 40 CFR Part 434. See Attachment C for the applicability and regulatory background. This point source category includes facilities reporting under Standard Industrial Classification ( SIC) industry group122, Bituminous Coal And Lignite Mining. Specifically, it includes SIC 1221, Bituminous Coal and Lignite Surface Mining, and SIC 1222, Bituminous Coal Underground Mining. No specific subcategories were identified during the Factor 4 analysis.

° SIC 1221  Bituminous Coal and Lignite Surface Mining Establishments primarily engaged in producing bituminous coal or lignite at surface mines or in developing bituminous coal or lignite surface mines. This industry includes auger mining, strip mining, culm bank mining, and other surface mining, by owners or lessees or by establishments which have complete responsibility for operating bituminous coal and lignite surface mines for others on a contract or fee basis. Bituminous coal and lignite preparation plants performing such activities as cleaning, crushing, screening or sizing are included if operated in conjunction with a mine site, or if operated independently of any type of mine.

° SIC 1222  Bituminous Coal Underground Mining Establishments primarily engaged in producing bituminous coal in underground mines or in developing bituminous coal underground mines. This industry includes underground mining by owners or lessees or by establishments which have complete responsibility for operating bituminous coal underground mines for others on a contract or fee basis. Bituminous coal preparation plants performing such activities as cleaning, crushing, screening or sizing are included if operated in conjunction with a mine. Independent bituminous coal preparation plants are classified in Industry 1221.

° SIC code 1231  Anthracite Mining Establishments primarily engaged in producing anthracite or in developing anthracite mines. All establishments in the United States that are classified in this industry are located in Pennsylvania. This industry includes mining by owners or lessees or by establishments which have complete responsibility for operating anthracite mines for others on a contract or fee basis. Also included are anthracite preparation plants, whether or not operated in conjunction with a mine.

The following tables present the facilities in this category that report to the Permit Compliance System ( PCS) and to the Toxic Release Inventory ( TRI). ( Note: Since this industry ranked low during the screening phase, EPA did not verify any of the information reported to PCS and TRI, and has used it as reported. Although the information in PCS and TRI is limited, it can provide insight into this industry. See Attachment A for more details about PCS and TRI.) Table 1 shows the number of facilities identified in this industry. Table 2 lists the facilities reporting to PCS under these SIC codes. Table 3 lists the facilities reporting to TRI under these SIC codes. Attachments D and E list these facilities along with their reported discharges. FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 4 of 37 Table 1. Number of Facilities SIC 1997 Census PCS TRI Total Major Minor Total No reported discharge Direct discharge Indirect discharge Both direct & indirect 1221 829 129 15 114 50 33 17 0 0 1222 614 17 1 16 27 22 5 0 0 1231 68 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Source: PCSLoads2000, TRIReleases2000 Table 2. Coal Mining Facilities Reporting to PCS, Sorted by State SIC Facility NPDES ID Facility Name Facility City & State 1221 AL0021971 JIM WALTER RESOURCES MINE 3 ADGER, AL 1221 AL0026590 JIM WALTER RESOURCES MINE 4 BROOKWOOD, AL 1221 AL0062421 DRUMMOND CO INCORP SHOAL CREEK ADGER, AL 1221 AL0003620 US STEEL MIN CO LLC CONCORD PT ADGER, AL 1222 CO0027154 TWENTYMILE COAL COMPANY OAK CREEK, CO 1221 MD0055182 METTIKI COAL LLC ( also reports to TRI) OAKLAND, MD 1221 MT0000892 DECKER COAL CO ( WEST MINE) DECKER, MT 1221 MT0024210 DECKER COAL CO ( EAST MINE) DECKER, MT 1221 UT0022918 CANYON FUEL CO. LLC  SUFCO MIDVALE, UT 1221 WV0050717 UPSHUR PROPERTY INC. BUCKHANNON, WV FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 5 of 37 Table 3. Coal Mining Facilities Reporting to TRI SIC Code Facility TRI ID Facility Name Facility City & State 1222 35006SSTLM8800O U. S. STEEL MINING CO. L. L. C. OAK GROVE SYS. ADGER, AL 1221 81625TRPPR65MIL TRAPPER MINING INC. CRAIG, CO 1221 61440FRMNN1480E FREEMAN UNITED COAL MINING CO. INDUSTRY MINE INDUSTRY, IL 1222 62634LKHRTELKHA ELKHART MINE ELKHART, IL 1221 47557PRDMN10471 PRIDE MINE S 321 MONROE CITY, IN 1221 47601VGCLC3700N VIGO COAL CO. INC. CYPRESS CREEK MINE BOONVILLE, IN 1222 21550MTTKC293TA METTIKI COAL L. L. C. OAKLAND, MD 1221 43812XFRDM544CH OXFORD MINING CO. INC. COSHOCTON, OH 1222 43976HRRSN86395 HARRISON PROCESSING CORP. HOPEDALE, OH 1221 45634SNDSH38701 SANDS HILL COAL CO. INC. HAMDEN, OH 1221 26504PTRTM22MIL PATRIOT MINING CO. INC. CROWN MINE STAR CITY, WV 1221 26504PTRTM12MIL PATRIOT MINING CO. INC. METZ MINE STAR CITY, WV 1221 26504PTRTM12MIA PATRIOT MINING CO. INC. DENTS RUN MINE STAR CITY, WV 1221 26707BFFLCRTE9A BUFFALO COAL CO. INC. PREP PLANT BAYARD, WV 1221 26707BFFLCRTE90 BUFFALO COAL CO. INC. C 1 BAYARD, WV 1221 25507CTNRY5914C CATENARY COAL CO. ESKDALE, WV 1221 25130HBTMNUSRT1 HOBET MINING INC. MADISON, WV 1221 24874KPLRPRTE97 KEPLER PROCESSING CO. POCAHONTAS NO 51 PREP PLANT PINEVILLE, WV 1221 25019VNDLRCOUNT VANDALIA RESOURCES INC. BICKMORE, WV 1221 25031PPLCHUSRTE APPALACHIAN MINING INC. BOOMER, WV 1221 26206VRGRNRTE82 EVERGREEN MINING CO. COWEN, WV 1222 25193LKRNCPOBOX ELK RUN COAL CO. CHESS PREPARATION PLANT SYLVESTER, WV Of the 31 facilities reporting water discharges to PCS or TRI, 13 are located in West Virginia and three are located nearby in eastern Ohio. Another 5 are in Alabama. The rest are located primarily in the midwest and west: two each in Indiana, Illinois, Montana and Colorado, and one each in Maryland and Utah. The map on the following page shows the locations of the facilities reporting to TRI or PCS. FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 6 of 37 U. S. Census data indicates a decrease in the number of the number of coal mines by almost 40% between 1992 and 1997. Value of goods shipped has also declined by 10% or more for bituminous coal during the same time period. Anthracite mining showed an almost 14% increase in value of goods shipped. See Table 4 below.

In addition to U. S. census data, statistics for the coal mining industry are provided by the U. S. Department of Labor and the Energy Information Administration ( EIA). Table 5 presents the number of coal operations in the U. S. from 1997 to 2002, generally decreasing by around 20%. Table 6 presents coal production from 1996 to 2000, which remains steady.

Table 4. 1992 and 1997 Census Data SIC Sector Number of Establishments Value of Goods Shipped ( in billions of dollars)

1997 1992 % Change 1997 1992 % Change 1221 Bituminous coal and lignite  surface 829 1,359  39.0 12.5 13.8  9.9 1222 Bituminous coal  underground 614 1,008  39.1 10.8 12.6  14.4 1231 Anthracite mining 68 Na Na 0.18 0.16 13.8 Source: 1997 U. S. Economic Census aN indicates that comparable data were not available Table 5. U. S. Coal Mining Operations from 1997 to 2002 Operations 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 % Change from 1997 to 2002 Underground Mines 968 910 817 771 777 711  26.5 Surface Mines 1,117 1,069 1,011 920 937 921  17.5 Preparation Plants 432 422 399 363 354 355  17.8 Total Mining Operations 2,578 2,459 2,274 2,099 2,122 2,046  20.6 Source: U. S. Department of Labor FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 8 of 37 Table 6. U. S. Coal Production from 1997 to 2000 ( in millions of short tons)

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Average Annual Percent Change ( 1996 2000)

Total U. S. Production 1,064 1,090 1,118 1,100 1,074 0.20 Source: EIA web page.

Wastewater Characteristics and Pollutant Sources No process water is used for coal extraction. Wastewater content varies according to mine location, soil content, and purity of the coal extracted. There is no correlation between production rate and wastewater volume. See Table 7 below for facility flow information.

Table 7. Wastewater Flows SIC code No. of Major Facilities Reporting Nonzero Flows Median Facility Flow 2000 ( MG) Range of Facility Flows 2000 ( MG) Total Flow 2000 ( MG)

1221 9 831.21 63  6,914 15,676.75 1222 1 526.11 NA 526.11 Source: PCSLoads2000. NA   no range was calculated; only one facility reported a nonzero flow.

Common sources of wastewater in the coal mining industry include precipitation, surface runoff, ground water infiltration, and coal preparation plant effluent. No process water is used during the coal mining process. Preparation plants use water for washing the coal to remove impurities. Characteristics of different classifications of coal mine wastewater are presented in Table 8. FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 9 of 37 Table 8. Sources of Process Wastewater in Coal Mining Wastewater Source Characteristics acid mine drainage suspended solids, low pH, high concentrations of iron and other metals alkaline mine drainage low levels of suspended solids, neutral or slightly high pH, low concentrations of metals.

preparation plants high levels of coal fines.

reclamation variable levels of suspended solids, low concentrations of iron & manganese.

Source: Coal Mining Technical Development Document.

Pollutants Discharged Pollutant discharges as reported to PCS and TRI were evaluated as part of the Factor 1 Analysis: Human Health and Environmental Impacts. Pounds reported as discharged were converted, wherever possible, to their toxic weighted pound equivalents to provide a sense of relative hazard associated with those discharges. ( Note: indirect discharge amounts reflect reductions that are expected to occur at the receiving treatment facility.) Both TRI and PCS contain information about pollutants discharged by coal mining facilities. These pollutants can be characterized as nonconventional, conventional, or priority pollutants.

PCS: Of the 10 facilities reporting discharges to PCS, one company's two mines in a single town in Montana contributes 73% of the pounds of pollutants discharged. The facility in Utah generates the third highest pounds discharged, accounting for an additional 21%. When looking at toxic weighted discharges, a single facility in Alabama contributes over 40% of the toxic weighted pound equivalents ( TWPE) discharged, and when these discharges are combined with other facilities also located in this town, 62% of the PCS TWPE are accounted for. Over 95% of the TWPE discharges reported to PCS originate from 6 facilities ( the three Alabama discharges and those of three other facilities) contribute.

TRI: Of the 22 facilities reporting to TRI, one company's two operations in a single town in West Virginia contributes 70% of the pounds discharged. Discharges from West Virginia alone account for 98% of all discharged pounds reported to TRI. When looking at toxic weighted discharges, 8 facilities contribute over 95% of the TWPE. Of these, a single facility with three mines in the same town contribute almost 50% of the TWPE reported to TRI.

Overall: Of the 31 facilities reporting to PCS and TRI ( one facility reports to both databases), one company's two mines in a single town in Montana contributes 72% of the total pounds of pollutants discharged. Discharges from the facility in Utah contribute an additional 21%. Together, these three facilities account for 93% of the pounds reported discharged by this industry. When looking at toxic FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 10 of 37 weighted discharges, 46% of the TWPE discharged comes from one company's three mines in a single West Virginia town and 52% come from discharges in the state as a whole. An additional 34% of the TWPE discharged comes from Ohio. There is a clear regional concentration of TWPE discharges, with 94% of all TWPE discharged by facilities in the adjacent states of West Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. Arranged by EPA Region, 52% of the TWPE is discharged in Region III and 42% of the TWPE is discharged in Region V.

Discharged pollutants that can be characterized as nonconventional, conventional, or priority pollutants. Table 9 below shows the relative contributions of each pollutant type. See Attachment D for the discharges in toxic weighted pounds as reported to PCS by facility and see Attachment E for the discharges in toxic weighted pounds as reported to TRI by facility. See Attachment F for a breakout of these discharges by pollutant. A discussion of each pollutant type discharged follows the table.

Table 9. Pollutant Discharges Reported to PCS and TRI Pollutant Category & Primary Pollutants PCS LBS PCS TWPE TRI LBS ( Direct Only) TRI TWPE ( Direct Only) All Pollutants 33,529,627 1,385 741,083 22,472 Nonconventional 31,563,104 1,380 739,958 2,245 Total Dissolved Solids ( TDS) 31,471,976 n/ a     Manganese 11,621 818 ( 59%) 16,400 1,155 ( 51%) Iron 7,742 434 ( 31%)     Ammonia as Nitrogen     723,229 1,089 ( 49%) Conventional 1,966,515 0 0 0 Total Suspended Solids ( TSS) 1,966,357       BOD 96       Oil and Grease 62       Priority 8* 5* 1,125 20,227 Mercury     149 17,444 ( 86%) Arsenic     769 2,668 ( 13%) * Copper discharge. FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 11 of 37 Nonconventional Pollutants About 94% of all the pounds reported discharged for this industry are nonconventional pollutants. Of these, total dissolved solids comprise 92% of the total pounds. However, a toxic weight is not available for this pollutant parameter. For both PCS and TRI discharges, manganese contributes over 50% of the toxic weighted pound equivalents ( TWPE) discharged. The remainder of the TWPE discharged are iron discharges in PCS and ammonia as nitrogen discharges in TRI.

Conventional Pollutants Conventional pollutants comprise about 6% of the total pounds reported as discharged. Over 99% of the pounds of conventional pollutants reported to PCS are total suspended solids. Again, toxic weights are not available for this pollutant parameter. No information on conventional pollutants is available through TRI.

Priority Pollutants Priority pollutants contribute the smallest portion of total pounds discharged ( less than 1%) but contribute the largest quantity of TWPE discharged by this industry. Of the TWPE discharges, 86% are due to reported mercury discharges reported to TRI. Another 13% are due to arsenic discharges, also reported to TRI. The only priority pollutant discharge reported to PCS is copper.

For purposes of comparison, the toxic weighted pound equivalents ( TWPE) for Coal Mining are presented in the following tables along with the industries reporting the highest discharges in each database. Table 10 presents the information reported to PCS and Table 11 presents the information reported to TRI. For a description of the derivation of the values in these tables, see the memo in the public record titled " Description and Results of EPA Methodology to Synthesize Screening Level Results for the Effluent Guidelines Program Plan for 2004/ 2005," which is available through Edocket at document number OW 2003 0074 0391.

Table 10. Coal Mining TWPE Reported to PCS Compared to Top Ranking Results 40 CFR Part Point Source Category PCS Reported TWPE PCS Rank 423 Steam electric power generation 2,933,209 1 414 Organic chemicals, plastics and synthetic fibers 1,805,928 2 422 Phosphate manufacturing 1,095,321 3 415 Inorganic chemicals manufacturing 853,568 4 421 Nonferrous metals manufacturing 434,925 5 440 Ore mining and dressing 383,560 6 40 CFR Part Point Source Category PCS Reported TWPE PCS Rank FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 12 of 37 410 Textile mills 296,601 7 419 Petroleum refining 198,251 8 455 Pesticide chemicals manufacturing, formulating 178,977 9 418 Fertilizer manufacturing 116,464 10 434 Coal Mining 1,385 32 Table 11. Coal Mining TWPE Reported to TRI Compared to Top Ranking Results 40 CFR Part Point Source Category TRI Reported TWPE TRI Rank 414 Organic chemicals, plastics and synthetic fibers 7,303,782 1 423 Steam electric power generation 1,856,645 2 421 Nonferrous metals manufacturing 978,450 3 430 Pulp, paper and paperboard ( Phase II) 628,785 4 415 Inorganic chemicals manufacturing 624,250 5 429 Timber products processing 404,926 6 419 Petroleum refining 385,347 7 455 Pesticide chemicals manufacturing, formulating 324,393 8 428 Rubber manufacturing 166,343 9 463 Plastic molding and forming 106,189 10 434 Coal Mining 22,472 21 FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 13 of 37 Treatment Technology and Pollution Prevention Acid discharges: Mines with acid discharges treat wastewater using chemical precipitation, pH adjustment, aeration, and settling. Neutralization and aeration promote oxidation of metals such as iron and magnesium. The metal ions form insoluble metal hydroxides, which precipitate out of solution and may be removed by settling. Acid mine drainage is caused by the oxidation of pyrite, which release iron, sulfide, and hydrogen ions into surface waters. In some locations, manganese also may be released. The rate of acid formation is dependent on the amount of pyrite in overburden, the presence of limestone or other neutralizers; and exposure to air containing the oxygen necessary for oxidation. Special handling techniques and water management may be applied to reduce acid mine drainage. Special handling techniques include identifying potentially acid rock prior to placement; and strategically locating potentially acid materials to minimize exposure to water and air. Water management techniques include 1) installing high wall drainage systems to promote surface runoff and reduce contact between water and the spoil surface; 2) installing spoil drains to minimize contact time between groundwater and mine spoil; 3) filling trenches with alkaline material to lower the rate of acid formation; and 4) flooding acidforming materials to avoid air contact.

Alkaline discharges: Some mines with alkaline discharges use settling ponds to remove suspended solids from wastewater.

Preparation plants: These plants use a slurry treatment system, consisting of a settling basin or clarifier and thickeners, to treat the coal wash water. Runoff from surrounding areas is treated in a settling pond.

Reclamation areas: Such areas use sedimentation ponds to remove solids from wastewater.

Concerns Identified Pre Proposal The Coal Mining point source category was identified by several responders surveyed by the Agency in the process of preparing the 2004/ 2005 Plan. Their suggestions are summarized below.

Comments on the 2002/ 2003 Plan ( Section 2.3 of the " Factor 4 Analysis: Implementation and Efficiency Considerations   Status of Screening Level Review Phase" ( Edocket OW 2003 0074 0329) A commenter asserted that the effluent guidelines for the coal mining point source category require revision because rainfall exemptions for coal mining in the current effluent guidelines allow for relaxation of limits as soon as it rains. Furthermore, the commenter stated that settlement basins used as primary control for mine drainage do not work very well when it rains. No supporting information was provided. In its August, 2002 response to comments, the Agency noted that it intended to fully consider coal mining operations when it develops future 304( m) plans. ( Note: The Engineering and Analysis Division recently revised these effluent guidelines, with revisions promulgated in January of 2002; however, the revised rule did not reassess the effluent limitations for precipitation events.)

Previous Suggestions ( Section 2.4 of the " Factor 4 Analysis") FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 14 of 37 Although responders recommended coal mining for revised effluent guidelines development, no specific concerns were noted.

AMSA & ASIWPCA ( Section 2.6 of the " Factor 4 Analysis") A stakeholder noted that Coal Mining operations discharge manganese, which is generating problems, notably in West Virginia streams. Follow up discussion with this stakeholder during the detailed investigation phase explained that manganese in coal mining effluent does not necessarily adversely effect the receiving stream as much as the discharge stream remaining after treatment to remove manganese, which consists basically of increasing the pH. ( The water quality standard for manganese is based on concerns for staining relative to drinking water uses.) The effluent then must be neutralized before discharging, and options typically include adding either acid or aluminum to the effluent to precipitate the manganese. ( Another side effect of changing the pH is the potential increase in concentration of the more toxic selenium in the effluent, since it can more readily leach into the water from the pit cleanings. See Attachment G.)

Concerns Identified in Comments to Proposal No concerns for the Coal Mining point source category were received in comments to the Preliminary Plan.

Followup Contacts The following contacts identified initial concerns and provided followup information for this category: Bill Telliard, EPA/ OST/ EAD ( 202) 566 1061 Dan Sweeney, EPA Region 3, ( 215) 814 5731 Connie Kagey, EPA Region 4, ( 404) 562 9300 Andrea Zimmer, EPA Region 4, ( 404) 562 9306 David Vande Linde, West Virginia DEP, ( 304) 759 0510 Possible Solutions EPA appreciates all comments and suggestions provided by the stakeholders and EPA Regional staff. Based on information reported to TRI and PCS, toxic discharges from coal mining operations are low relative to other industrial categories. In addition, a few facilities generally drive the toxic weighted pound equivalents ( TWPE) for this industry. The pollutants driving the TWPE estimate for these few facilities are mercury and arsenic. Stakeholders and EPA staff identified various issues associated with discharges from coal mining operations. The information in the record at this time does not support the concerns raised. As with any comments received by the Agency, EPA can not address these suggestions without adequate supporting data. In the event that stakeholders provide additional data and supporting information, on these or any of the issues identified above, EPA will reevaluate them at that time. In the FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 15 of 37 absence of revisions to the effluent guidelines, these concerns could be addressed through improved information dissemination and outreach by EPA.

Stormwater concerns: Stormwater issues could be addressed through the development and distribution of a guidance document on the topic. In fact, such guidance was promised in the final 1985 regulation for coal mining ( at 50 FR 41301, published on October 9, 1985). However, for purposes of the coal mining effluent guidelines, all water that falls on a mining site is considered process water and should be treated as such. Stormwater was specifically considered during the development of the Western Mining regulations, and is part of the modeling described for calculating total discharge. EPA has prepared two CD ROMs in coordination with the Department of Interior's Office of Surface Mining ( OSM) provides information on all the BMPs and the other provides formulas for determining baseline performance and calculating limits, including the stormwater loadings for the western mining category.

High discharges of TDS and TSS: Pollutants TDS and TSS do not have toxic weighting factors, so discharges of these substances cannot be assessed in terms of potential risk. However, EPA has prepared two CD ROMs in coordination with the Department of Interior's Office of Surface Mining. One provides information on all the BMPs and the other provides formulas for determining baseline performance and calculating limits. ( Note: Although discharges of TDS and TSS are frequently the result of stormwater runoff, no one identified concerns specifically associated with these types of discharges.)

Manganese concerns: Manganese was included in the guidelines because it was historically a parameter indicating acid mine drainage, and is easy to measure. In addition, the treatment to remove manganese ensured that other metals present in wastewater would be removed during the process. During postmining activities, these concerns could be addressed through the use of a sampling protocol to determine whether manganese discharges were in fact adversely impacting the receiving stream. Such a protocol would be used to determine eligibility for manganese limit modifications to an NPDES permit for water quality limits only. An example protocol was provided by David Vande Linde of West Virginia, where it was in use until the state adopted a water quality standard for manganese, and can be found at Attachment H. However, since manganese is limited through the ELG, the only way to waive monitoring of this pollutant is to demonstrate that it is not present.

Additional Issues: During followup discussions, the need to consider far field effects was raised ( downstream impacts of coal mine discharges). Guidance could provide assistance for addressing farfield effects which are not generally considered. It could also identify resources available to permit writers, including the data collection requirements provided through the Office of Surface Mining and the guidance manuals developed by the Acid Drainage Technology Initiative of the International Network for Acid Prevention ( INAP).

Two supporting documents published by the National Mine Land Reclamation Center at West Virginia University will be included in the public record for this planning process: 1) Prediction of Water Quality at Surface Mines, prepared by members of the Prediction Workgroup of the Acid Drainage Technology Initiative ( ADTI), and 2) A Handbook of Technologies for Avoidance and Remediation of Acid Mine FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 16 of 37 Drainage prepared by J. Skousen, A. Rose, G. Geidel, J. Foreman, R. Evans, W. Hellier, and members of the Avoidance and Remediation Working Group of the Acid Drainage Technology Initiative ( ADTI). An additional resource that is available but not included in the public record is Acid Mine Drainage Control & Treatment, second edition, compiled by Jeffrey Skousen and Paul Ziemkiewicz, and also available through the National Mine Land Reclamation Center at West Virginia University.

Summary of Potential Solutions: Concerns identified for this industry could be addressed through improved information dissemination and outreach by EPA. The Agency could prepare a fact sheet with answers to frequently asked questions ( FAQs) and post it on its web site. In addition, the Agency could announce the availability of this fact sheet, the CD ROMS of implementation information, and the name of the Engineering and Analysis Division ( EAD) staff available to answer questions. Finally, it could disseminate useful information developed by the Acid Drainage Technology Initiative, and its parent organization, The International Network for Acid Prevention. These announcements could be made at the regular meetings for permit writers and pretreatment coordinators held by the Office of Wastewater Management ( OWM) and also through email alerts to the EAD stakeholders mailing list. Finally, due to the relatively small number of facilities discharging the bulk of the TWPE, EPA could also provide assistance to permit writers in preparing BPJ based permits. FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 17 of 37 Attachment A EPA Databases and References Used in this Review Overview of the 304( m) Planning Process CWA Section 304( m)( 1) requires EPA to establish a schedule for the annual review and revision of all existing effluent guidelines and to identify categories of point sources discharging toxic or non conventional pollutants for which EPA has not published effluent guidelines. To accomplish this review, EPA conducted a screening level analysis using readily available information from EPA's Permit Compliance System ( PCS) and Toxics Release Inventory ( TRI) databases. EPA estimated the mass of pollutants discharged from each category, weighted the pollutant releases based on chemical toxicity, and ranked the categories based on the toxicweighted pollutant releases.

In addition to reported discharges in PCS and TRI, EPA used other readily available data, as well as information from public outreach, including industry categories recommended by stakeholders for regulatory development or regulatory revision, to evaluate implementation and efficiency considerations.

For additional details on EPA's screening level analysis refer the following documents in EPA Docket Number OW 2003 0074:

Memorandum: Description and Results of EPA Methodology to Synthesize Screening Level Results for the Effluent Guidelines Program Plan for 2004/ 2005, DCN 548, Section 3.0;

Development of PCSLoads 2000, DCN 620, Section 2.1.2 ( this document explains how pollutant loads were calculated from PCS data); and

Evaluation of RSEI Model Runs, DCN 618, Section 2.1.1.

Information from EPA's Permit Compliance System ( PCS) and Toxics Release Inventory ( TRI) databases were used to create the PCSLoads2000 and TRIReleases2000 databases. These databases were the primary source of information used to conduct this review. Since this industry ranked low during the screening phase, however, EPA did not verify any of the information reported to PCS and TRI, and has used it as reported.

TRIReleases2000 The Toxic Release Inventory ( TRI) is the major source of data for the TRIReleases2000 database. TRI is the common name for Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 18 of 37 Right to Know Act ( EPCRA). Each year, facilities that meet certain thresholds must report their releases and other waste management activities for listed toxic chemicals. That is, facilities must report the quantities of toxic chemicals recycled, collected and combusted for energy recovery, treated for destruction, or disposed of. A separate report must be filed for each chemical that exceeds the reporting threshold. The TRI list of chemicals for reporting year 2000 includes more than 600 chemicals and chemical categories. For this review, EPA used data for reporting year 2000, because they were the most recent available at the time the review began.

There are three criteria that a facility must meet to be required to submit a TRI report for that reporting year. The criteria are:

( 1) SIC Code Determination: Facilities in SIC Codes 20 through 39, seven additional SIC codes outside this range, and federal facilities must concern themselves with TRI reporting. EPA rarely checks or refutes facility claims regarding the SIC code identification. The primary SIC code determines TRI reporting.

( 2) Number of Employees: Facilities must have 10 or more full time employees or their equivalent. EPA defines a " full time equivalent" as a person that works 2,000 hours in the reporting year ( there are several exceptions and special circumstances that are well defined in the TRI reporting instructions).

( 3) Activity Thresholds: If the facility is in a covered SIC code and has 10 or more full time employee equivalents it must conduct an activity threshold analysis for every chemical and chemical category on the current TRI list. The facility must determine whether it manufactures, processes, OR otherwise uses each chemical at or above the appropriate activity threshold. Reporting thresholds are not based on the amount of release. All TRI thresholds are based on mass, not concentration. Different thresholds apply for persistent bioaccumulative toxic ( PBT) chemicals than for non PBT chemicals.

In TRI, facilities report annual loads released to the environment of each toxic chemical or chemical category that meets reporting requirements. They must report onsite releases to air, receiving streams, disposal to land, underground wells, and several other categories. They must also report the amount of toxic chemicals in wastes transferred to off site locations, including discharges to POTWs and other off site locations, such as commercial waste disposal facilities.

For this review, EPA focused on the amount of chemicals facilities reported either discharging directly to a receiving stream or transferring to a POTW. For facilities discharging directly to a stream, the loads were taken directly from the reported TRI data for calendar year 2000. For facilities that transfer toxic chemicals to POTWs, EPA first adjusted the TRI pollutant loads reported to be transferred to POTWs to account for pollutant removal that occurs at the POTW prior to discharge to the receiving stream. This adjustment was made using POTW FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 19 of 37 removal efficiencies from EPA's Risk Screening Environmental Indicators ( RSEI) model ( see Section 2.1.1 of the docket for more information on TRI and the RSEI model).

Reporting facilities are not required to sample and analyze wastestreams to determine the quantities of toxic chemicals released. They may estimate releases based on mass balance calculations, published emission factors, site specific emission factors, or other approaches. Facilities are required to indicate, by a reporting code, the basis of their release estimate. TRI's reporting guidance is that for chemicals reasonably expected to be present but measured below the detection limit, facilities should use one half the detection limit to estimate the mass released. The guidance is slightly different for dioxins and dioxin like compounds in that it allows nondetects to be treated as zero.

TRI provides the option for facilities to report releases as specific numbers or as ranges, if appropriate. Specific estimates are encouraged if data are available to ensure the accuracy; however, EPA allows facilities to report releases in the following ranges: 1 to 10 pounds, 11 to 499 pounds, and 500 to 999 pounds. For this analysis, EPA used the mid point of each reported range to represent a facility's releases.

EPA weighted the direct and indirect pollutant releases to surface waters using toxic weighting factors ( TWFs) developed by Office of Water/ Engineering and Analysis Division ( EAD), to calculate toxic weighted pound equivalents ( TWPE) for each reported release. See 4.2.3 and 4.2.4 for more discussion of TWFs and calculation of TWPE. EPA compiled data taken from TRI, the adjusted releases from POTWs to surface waters, the calculated TWPE, and the relationship between SIC codes and point source category into a Microsoft Access   database named TRIReleases2000. Some corrections were made to this database as further study was conducted on the TRI data. Limitations of TRI are discussed in Section IV of the Technical Support Document for this planning process.

PCSLoads2000 The Permit Compliance System ( PCS) is the major source of data for the PCSLoads2000 database. PCS is a computerized management information system maintained by EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance ( OECA). It was created to track permit, compliance, and enforcement status of facilities regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) program under the Clean Water Act ( CWA).

More than 65,000 industrial facilities and water treatment plants have obtained permits for water discharges of regulated pollutants. To provide an initial framework for setting permit issuance priorities, EPA developed a major/ minor classification system for industrial and municipal wastewater discharges. Major discharges almost always have the capability to impact receiving waters if not controlled and, therefore, have been accorded more regulatory attention than minor discharges. There are approximately 6,400 facilities ( including sewerage systems) FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 20 of 37 with major discharges for which PCS has extensive records. Permitting authorities classify discharges as major based on an assessment of six characteristics:

( 1) toxic pollutant potential; ( 2) ratio of discharge flow to stream flow; ( 3) conventional pollutant loading; ( 4) public health impact; ( 5) water quality factors; and ( 6) proximity to coastal waters.

Facilities with major discharges must report compliance with NPDES permit limits via monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports ( DMRs) submitted to the permitting authority. The permitting authority enters the reported DMR data into PCS, including the type of violation ( if any), concentration and quantity values, and the Quarterly Non Compliance Report ( QNCR) indicators. Minor discharges may, or may not, adversely impact receiving water if not controlled. Therefore, EPA does not require DMRs for facilities with minor discharges. For this reason, the PCS database includes data only for a limited set of minor dischargers when the states choose to include these data. As a consequence, extensive data are not available for minor discharges in PCS.

Parameters in PCS include water quality parameters ( such as pH and temperature), specific chemicals, bulk parameters ( such as BOD 5 and TSS), and flow rates. Although other pollutants may be discharged, PCS only contains data for the parameters identified in the facility's NPDES permit. Facilities typically report monthly average pounds per day discharged, but also report daily maxima, and pollutant concentrations.

For this review, EPA used data for reporting year 2000, to correspond to the data obtained from TRI. EPA used its Effluent Data Statistics ( EDS) system program to calculate annual pollutant discharges using the monthly reports in PCS. Because units of measure vary widely in PCS, EPA developed the EDS system to estimate mass loadings based on data stored in PCS. The EDS system uses existing PCS reported mass loading values or multiplies reported discharge flows and effluent concentrations to estimate loadings for each outfall ( discharge pipe), taking into account the various units of concentration and flow rates.

Where concentrations were reported as below detection limit ( BDL) EPA assumed the parameter concentration was equal to zero for parameters never detected by the facility in 2000. For parameters sometimes detected and sometimes not, the " BDL" concentration was set equal to half of the detection limit. . The EDS system program sums the monthly loads to calculate annual discharges, interpolating ( using average reported loads) for months with missing reports.

EPA weighted the calculated annual pollutant discharges using EAD's TWFs to calculate TWPE for each reported discharge, as it did for the reported TRI releases. See sections 4.2.3 and 4.2.4 for more discussion of TWFs and calculation of TWPE. EPA compiled data taken from FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 21 of 37 PCS, the calculated TWPE, and the relationship between SIC codes and point source category into a Microsoft Access   database named PCSLoads2000. As further study was conducted on the PCS data, some corrections were made.

Other Information Sources In addition to TRI and PCS, EPA used the following sources of information in its review of this industry:

1997 Economic Census data.

Contacts with reporting facilities to verify reported releases and facility categorization.

US EPA, 1981. Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Coal Mining Point Source Category. 440181057b.

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 1998. Coal mine drainage prediction and pollution prevention in Pennsylvania. PA DEP, Harrisburg, PA.

US Census Bureau. Comparative Statistics for the United States. Accessed at < http:// www. census. gov> on June 28, 2004.

U. S. Department of Labor web page. Accessed at < http:// www. msha. gov/ ACCINJ/ BOTHCL. HTM > on July 2, 2004.

Energy Information Administration ( EIA) web page. Accessed at < http:// www. eia. doe. gov/ cneaf/ coal/ cia/ html/ t1p01p1. html > on July 2, 2004. FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 22 of 37 Attachment B Point Source Categories Identified Solely Through Factor 4 Industry Formal Comment Process Previous Suggestions ( Sec. 2.4) Draft Strategy Outreach Comments on Draft Strategy ( Sec. 2.2) Comments on 2002/ 2003 Plan ( Sec. 2.3) Permitting Authorities ( Sec. 2.5) AMSA & ASIWPCA ( Sec. 2.6)

Coal Mining

Coil Coating

Dairy Products Processing

Electrical and Electronic Components

Fruits and Vegetable Processing

Metal Molding and Casting

Mineral Mining and Processing

Seafood Processing

FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 23 of 37 Attachment C Guidelines Applicability and Regulatory History Applicability of 40 CFR Part 434 Subpart A   General Provisions. This part applies to discharges from any coal mine at which the extraction of coal is taking place or is planned to be undertaken and to coal preparation plants and associated areas.

Subpart B   Coal Preparation Plants and Coal Preparation Plant Associated Areas. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to discharges from coal preparation plants and coal preparation plant association areas, as indicated, including discharges which are pumped, siphoned, or drained from the coal preparation plant water circuit and coal storage, refuse storage, and ancillary areas related to the cleaning or beneficiation of coal of any rank including, but not limited to, bituminous, lignite, and anthracite.

Subpart C   Acid or Ferruginous Mine Drainage. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to acid or ferruginous mine drainage from an active mining area resulting from the mining of coal of any rank including, but not limited to, bituminous, lignite, and anthracite.

Subpart D   Alkaline Mine Drainage. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to alkaline mine drainage from an active mining area resulting from the mining of coal of any rank including, but not limited to, bituminous, lignite, and anthracite.

Subpart E   Post Mining Areas. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to discharges from post mining areas, except as provided in subpart H   Western Alkaline Coal Mining of this part.

Subpart F   Miscellaneous Provisions. The provisions of this subpart F apply to this part 434 as specified in subparts B, C, D, E and G of this part.

Subpart G   Coal Remining ( a) This subpart applies to pre existing discharges that are located within or are hydrologically connected to pollution abatement areas of a coal remining operation.

( b) A pre existing discharge that is intercepted by active mining or that is commingled with waste streams from active mining areas for treatment is subject to the provisions of Subpart F, § 434.61, " commingling of waste streams." For the purposes of this subpart, § 434.61 requires compliance with applicable BPT, BAT, BCT, and NSPS effluent limitations in subparts C, D, and F of this part. Section 434.61 applies to the commingled waste stream only during the time when the preexisting discharge is intercepted by active mining or is commingled with active mine wastewater for treatment or discharge. After commingling has ceased, the pre existing discharge is subject to the provisions of this part. FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 24 of 37 ( c) In situations where coal remining operations seek reissuance of an existing remining permit with BPJ limitations and the regulatory authority determines that it is not feasible for a remining operator to re establish baseline pollutant levels in accordance with the statistical procedures contained in Appendix B of this part, pre existing discharge limitations at existing remining operations shall remain subject to baseline pollutant levels established during the original permit application.

( d) The effluent limitations in this subpart apply to pre existing discharges until the appropriate SMCRA authority has authorized bond release.

Subpart H   Western Alkaline Coal Mining ( a) This subpart applies to alkaline mine drainage at western coal mining operations from reclamation areas, brushing and grubbing areas, topsoil stockpiling areas, and regraded areas.

( b) This subpart applies to drainage at western coal mining operations from reclamation areas, brushing and grubbing areas, topsoil stockpiling areas, and regraded areas where the discharge, before any treatment, meets all the following requirements: ( 1) pH is equal to or greater than 6.0; ( 2) Dissolved iron concentration is less than 10 mg/ L; and ( 3) Net alkalinity is greater than zero.

( c) The effluent limitations in this subpart apply until the appropriate SMCRA authority has authorized bond release.

REGULATORY BACKGROUND Regulatory History ° BPT limitations for Subparts B ( preparation plants), C ( acid drainage mines), and D ( alkaline drainage mines) were first promulgated on April 26, 1977.

° NSPS were promulgated for Subparts B, C, and D on January 12, 1979, and subcategories for reclamation and western mines were established.

° EPA revised BPT and NSPS rainfall exemptions on December 28, 1979.

° Proposed BAT and NSPS limitations for all subcategories were published in January 1981 including proposed amendments to BPT.

° The technology basis of existing regulations was neutralization and settling. FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 25 of 37 Existing Limitations Limits for BAT are the same as BPT limits. NSPS is identical to BAT, except NSPS require no discharge of wastewater pollutants from preparation plants ( Subpart B). The technology basis for the no discharge requirement was a complete water recycle system.

No limits were proposed for Subpart H ( Western Mines). Operators are required to submit and implement a Sediment Control Plan to maintain sediment discharges at or below pre mining levels.

Table C 1. Effluent Guidelines for Coal Mining Part 434 BPT  30 day averages ( mg/ L) BPT  daily maximum ( mg/ L)

TSS 35 70 Settleable Solidsa 0.5 mL/ L pH within range of 6 to 9 within range of 6 to 9 Iron, Total 3.5 7.0 Manganese, Totalb 2.0 4.0 Source: Coal Mining TDD aLimits for settleable solids only apply to Subpart E ( post mining areas). bNo manganese limits exist for Subpart D ( alkaline drainage mines).

° Subpart F, Miscellaneous Provisions, contains alternative limirations that apply during precipitation events. The limitations in Table C 2 apply to discharges that result from a rainfall or snowmelt event less than the 10 year, 24 hour design storm. For events greater than the 10 year, 24 hour precipitation event, there are no limitations on settleable solids. The only limitation is that pH remain between 6 and 9.

Table C 2 Catastrophic Precipitation Event Exemption Pollutant Parameter BPT  daily maximum Settleable Solidsa 0.5 mL/ L pH within range of 6 to 9 Source: Coal Mining Technical Development Document a No limits on settleable solids when precipitation exceeds the the 10 year, 24 hour storm. FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 26 of 37 Other Regulations In addition to regulating wastewater discharges, EPA regulates hazardous and solid waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA) and air emissions under the Clean Air Act ( CAA). Other regulating authorities include:

° Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration ( MSHA): Responsible for all federally required plans, approvals, certifications, and liscensing relating to mine safety.

° Department of Interior, Office of Surface Mining ( OSM): Regulates active coal mining operations and supports the reclamation of abandoned mines as required by the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 ( SMCRA).

° Army Corps of Engineers ( COE): Responsible for processing permit applications and issuing permits as outlined in Section 404 of the CWA. FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 27 of 37 Attachment D PCS Discharges SIC NPDES ID NAME CITY Flow ( MGD) LBS/ YR1 TWPE1 Percent of Total SIC TWPE1 Cumulative % of Total SIC TWPE1 1221 AL0021971 JIM WALTER RESOURCES MINE 3 ADGER 2 627,443 588 44% 44%

1221 AL0026590 JIM WALTER RESOURCES MINE 4 BROOKWOOD 9 504,807 278 21% 65%

1221 AL0062421 DRUMMOND CO INCORP SHOAL CREEK ADGER 19 528,932 219 16% 81%

1221 WV0050717 UPSHUR PROPERTY INC. BUCKHANNON 1 19,751 167 12% 94%

1221 AL0003620 US STEEL MIN CO LLC CONCORD PT ADGER 5 259,923 45 3% 97%

1221 MD0055182 METTIKI COAL LLC OAKLAND 0 1,078 19 1221 MT0000892 DECKER COAL CO ( WEST MINE) DECKER 2 8,990,509 9 1221 UT0022918 CANYON FUEL CO. LLC  SUFCO MIDVALE 3 7,041,007 8 1221 MT0024210 DECKER COAL CO ( EAST MINE) DECKER 2 15,542,295 4 1221 TOTAL 43 33,515,744 1,336 1222 CO0027154 TWENTYMILE COAL COMPANY OAK CREEK 1 13,893 49 100% 100%

1222 TOTAL 1 13,893 49 Total for Both SICs 33,529,637 1,385 FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 28 of 37 Attachment E TRI Discharges  Only Direct Discharges Reported SIC Code Facility TRI ID Facility Name Facility City Facility State Total lbs Total TWPE Percent Total of SIC TWPE Cumulative Percent Total of SIC TWPE 1221 26504PTRTM22MIL PATRIOT MINING CO. INC. CROWN MINE STAR CITY WV 871 5,912 163% 163%

1221 43812XFRDM544CH OXFORD MINING CO. INC. COSHOCTON OH 39 4,566 126% 289%

1221 26504PTRTM12MIL PATRIOT MINING CO. INC. METZ MINE STAR CITY WV 25 2,927 81% 369%

1221 26504PTRTM12MIA PATRIOT MINING CO. INC. DENTS RUN MINE STAR CITY WV 1,739 2,240 62% 431%

1221 47557PRDMN10471 PRIDE MINE S 321 MONROE CITY IN 3,137 1,185 33% 464%

1221 26707BFFLCRTE9A BUFFALO COAL CO. INC. PREP PLANT BAYARD WV 456,558 687 19% 483%

1221 61440FRMNN1480E FREEMAN UNITED COAL MINING CO.

INDUSTRY MINE INDUSTRY IL 9,550 673 19% 501%

1221 26707BFFLCRTE90 BUFFALO COAL CO. INC. C 1 BAYARD WV 61,204 92 3% 504%

1221 25507CTNRY5914C CATENARY COAL CO. ESKDALE WV 59,856 90 2% 506%

1221 81625TRPPR65MIL TRAPPER MINING INC. CRAIG CO 204 80 2% 508%

1221 25130HBTMNUSRT1 HOBET MINING INC. MADISON WV 51,626 78 2% 511%

1221 24874KPLRPRTE97 KEPLER PROCESSING CO. POCAHONTAS NO 51 PREP PLANT PINEVILLE WV 42,748 64 2% 512%

1221 47601VGCLC3700N VIGO COAL CO. INC. CYPRESS CREEK MINE BOONVILLE IN 313 40 1% 513%

1221 25019VNDLRCOUNT VANDALIA RESOURCES INC. BICKMORE WV 15,430 23 1% 514%

1221 25031PPLCHUSRTE APPALACHIAN MINING INC. BOOMER WV 10,350 16 0% 514%

1221 45634SNDSH38701 SANDS HILL COAL CO. INC. HAMDEN OH 1,500 2 0% 515%

1221 26206VRGRNRTE82 EVERGREEN MINING CO. COWEN WV 102 0 0% 515%

1221 TOTAL 715,252 18,675 1222 43976HRRSN86395 HARRISON PROCESSING CORP. HOPEDALE OH 33 3,630 16% 16%

1222 21550MTTKC293TA METTIKI COAL L. L. C. OAKLAND MD 1,520 103 0% 17%

1222 25193LKRNCPOBOX ELK RUN COAL CO. CHESS PREPARATION PLANT SYLVESTER WV 23,855 36 0% 17%

1222 35006SSTLM8800O U. S. STEEL MINING CO. L. L. C. OAK GROVE SYS. ADGER AL 379 22 0% 17%

1222 62634LKHRTELKHA ELKHART MINE ELKHART IL 44 6 0% 17%

1222 TOTAL 25,831 3,796 Total for Both SICs 741,083 22,472 FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 29 of 37 FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 30 of 37 Attachment F Reported Pollutant Loadings SIC Pollutant Name CAS Poll Grp Code PCS Discharges TRI Direct Discharges No. Facils Reporting Pollutant Pounds TWPE No. Facils Reporting Pollutant Pounds TWPE SIC 1221 1221 BOD 5 DAY ( CARBONACEOUS) C003 CP 4 96 1221 OIL AND GREASE C035 CP 7 62 1221 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS C009 CP 14 1,953,532 1221 SUM OF CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 1,953,690 0 0 0 1221 COBALT 7440484 NC 1 1 0.1 1221 AMMONIA AS NITROGEN 7664417 NC 9 699,374 1,053 1221 MANGANESE 7439965 NC 6 11,034 777 6 14,823 1,044 1221 BARIUM 7440393 NC 1 37 0.1 1221 CHLORIDE 16887006 NC 1 2 0.000044 1221 CHLORINE, TOTAL RESIDUAL 7782505 NC 1 5 2 1221 ALUMINUM 7429905 NC 1 1,952 126 1221 IRON 7439896 NC 13 76,968 431 1221 TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN C021 NC 1 107 1221 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS C010 NC 4 31,471,976 1221 SUM OF NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 31,562,044 1,336 714,235 2,097 1221 LEAD 7439921 PP 1 28 63 1221 CHROMIUM 7440473 PP 2 34 17 1221 ARSENIC 7440382 PP 2 769 2,668 1221 COPPER 7440508 PP 2 18 11 1221 NICKEL 7440020 PP 2 28 3 1221 ZINC 7440666 PP 1 22 1 1221 MERCURY 7439976 PP 4 118 13,815 1221 SUM OF PRIORITY POLLUTANTS 0 0 1,017 16,578 SIC Pollutant Name CAS Poll Grp Code PCS Discharges TRI Direct Discharges No. Facils Reporting Pollutant Pounds TWPE No. Facils Reporting Pollutant Pounds TWPE FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 31 of 37 SIC 1222 1222 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS C009 CP 1 12,825 1222 SUM OF CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 12,825 0 0 0 1222 AMMONIA AS NITROGEN 7664417 NC 1 23,855 36 1222 BARIUM 7440393 NC 2 291 1 1222 IRON 7439896 NC 1 474 3 1222 MANGANESE 7439965 NC 1 587 41 4 1,577 111 1222 SUM OF NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 1,060 44 25,723 148 1222 ZINC 7440666 PP 2 38 2 1222 CHROMIUM 7440473 PP 2 33 17 1222 COPPER 7440508 PP 1 8 5 1222 MERCURY 7439976 PP 1 31 3,629 1222 NICKEL 7440020 PP 1 6 1 1222 SUM OF PRIORITY POLLUTANTS 8 5 108 3,649 FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 32 of 37 Attachment G THE OCCURRENCE OF SELENIUM IN THE UPPER KANAWHA FORMATION OF THE PENNSYLVANIAN SYSTEM IN THE SOUTHERN WEST VIRGINIA COAL FIELDS ABSTRACT An exhaustive search of the literature on selenium reveals that there are little or no studies available on the concentrations of selenium in rock overburden anywhere in the United States. The Environmental Protection Agency's ( EPA) concern with the instream concentrations of selenium in the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement conducted in 6 watersheds in West Virginia for mountaintop mining, brought the lack of data on selenium to the attention of West Virginia's Department of Environmental Protection ( DEP). To acquire data for a mining National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit ( NPDES), the DEP's Water Resource section required the drilling of holes to secure data on selenium in the overburden of selected surface mine permits. The results, procedures and conclusions drawn from the initial drilling under this requirement are presented in this paper.

DISCUSSION The EPA conducted extensive water testing in 6 watersheds in West Virginia in conjunction with the mountaintop mining EIS. This study was started in 1999 and a draft report on findings is available. In addition to the typical metals that are analyzed for in a surface mine ( SMCRA) permit, selenium was noted as a trace metal of concern by the EPA. This concern arose from selenium concentrations in excess of the 5 ppb instream chronic water quality limit that exists in West Virginia. Because the EIS study purposely picked areas that were/ are being surface mined in the state, the conclusion has been drawn that surface mining areas, particularly valley fills, are contributing to the selenium concentrations noted. A literature search on selenium revealed that extensive research on selenium in fly ash ( Lemly) and soils ( Vance) were available, but no papers or research was noted on the concentrations of selenium in rock overburden. This was important to the WVDEP, because we needed to know where the selenium was concentrated on a surface mine job to suggest ways to handle overburden or use other techniques to mine the coal without harming the aquatic environment with toxic selenium, which can cause harm to fish tissue, animals etc. through bio concentration. A study by the West Virginia Geologic Survey ( WVGS) was posted on the internet that indicated that coal seams of the Upper Kanawha Formation of the Pennsylvanian System was much higher in selenium than other strata in the coal areas of the Appalachians. This study was done by measuring the trace metals in the fly ash of the coal seams that were burned in the state, and back calculating the amount of selenium in the total coal seam. The WVGS study, and other research reviewed, plus conversations with analytical laboratory personnel, indicated that the selenium was associated with organic/ carbon based material, like coal seams, carbonaceous shale, etc. Previous work on coal ash and associated materials by one of the authors of this paper for various coal companies also indicated that the coal seams and associated " pit cleanings" ( carbonaceous roof, floor and parting material) held the highest concentrations of selenium in the overburden. If the vertical location of the selenium in the " pit cleanings" was correct, then it was possible to design a materials handling plan to isolate this material that would be not cost prohibitive in the mining sequence.

PROTOCOL USED TO ACQUIRE AND ANALYZE THE OVERBURDEN SAMPLES FOR SELENIUM FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 33 of 37 2. Since 1999, the WVDEP has required all of the baseline water sites that are submitted for a surface mine permit to be tested for trace metals and other compounds, such as phenols, on a one time basis. This data, plus data from several other sources ( 1.) NPDES renewal Table IV C analyses. ( 2.) Data from the Federal Office of Surface Mining ( OSM) trend sites. ( 3) Data from the EIS in certain watersheds. ( 4) Data from Water Resources for TMDL's ( Total Maximum Daily Loads) etc., is evaluated for selenium and other trace metal concentrations to see if a problem exists.( 5) Check the latest 303( d) impaired streams list from the Division of water Resources. Any area that has had previous mining and reflects over 5 ppb selenium ( current instream chronic water quality standard for selenium) will be selected for drilling to sample the overburden. 4. The drilling will be on approximately 2000' spacing, or other spacing required by the geologist reviewing the surface mining ( SMCRA) permit. The holes will be located on the tops of the ridges and drill down to 10' below the lowest seam to be mined. This will insure that all the overburden to be removed is covered in it's entirety. 6. The core from the drilling will be broken down into vertical sections of 5' or less if the strata type changes. The object is to break the core down into small recognizable sections that can be separated by high selenium content in the mining sequence. 8. Each 5' or less section is then analyzed for total selenium by the 3050B ( for Acid digestion of Solis) method. This method uses a graphite furnace that can detect selenium to a Minimum Detection Limit of 1 ppb. Any strata that has a total selenium concentration of 1mg/ kg is considered potentially toxic and will have to undergo an additional leachate test. 10. There are several leachate tests available for the next level. They are ( 1) Column Leaching ( 2) Soxhlet ( 3) Phosphate etc. Any leachate test that results in a reading of greater that 5 ug/ kg will be considered toxic for selenium and will be included in a specific materials handling plan.

RESULTS FROM DRILLING IN LOGAN AND MINGO COUNTIES IN SOUTHERN WEST VIRGINIA The protocol was applied to 3 mining areas in the spring of 2004. The results of 1 hole from northern Logan County, 5 holes from southern Logan County and 1 hole from Mingo County are included in this paper. The cross section of the Phoenix # 4 area in southern Logan County and the drill logs with selenium content in the other two areas indicate that the selenium is concentrated in the " pit cleanings" as theorized at the beginning of the study. The potentially toxic selenium concentrations of 1mg/ kg are almost solely concentrated in the coal seams, partings and roof and floor of the seams to be mined. The leachate tests on these holes are in progress and the subject of a followup paper. The current results definitively indicate that the selenium has an affinity for organic material in the overburden column.

RECOMMENDED MATERIALS HANDLING PLAN 2. Because the toxic selenium material that needs to be isolated is concentrated in small vertical zones that have to be set aside to recover the coal seam, and the material is a black/ dark gray material that is visibly differentiated in the field, the mining company can split this material out in the coal pits. ( see figure __). FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 34 of 37 4. It is important to rip up 6" to 1' of the floor of the bottom coal seam so that no selenium laden material is left to contaminate the water/ rock interface. 6. The toxic material should be removed to an area on the job that is high and dry away from water course, and under no circumstance should any of this material be put in a valley fill. 8. The material should then be put on a free draining pad of @ 10' of coarse non selenium laden material and covered with at least 4' of the most impervious material on the surface mine job. This method will keep water from leaching through the selenium laden overburden.

CONCLUSIONS It is apparent from the analytical results to date that the selenium is concentrated in the " pit cleanings". The cut off of 1mg/ kg limit for identifying the material that has to undergo further leachate testing looks valid in differentiating the high selenium material to be isolated from the lower concentration material. The visual difference of the black / darker selenium laden material from the other overburden in the Upper Kanawha series is very useful in separating the toxic material from the non toxic in the field. Further work needs to be done on the different methods of leachate tests to calculate what percentage of selenium in the overburden will be mobilized into the hydrologic environment. The moral to the story is to isolate the black/ darker selenium laden material and to keep any of this material from the valley fills. This material , besides having high concentrations of selenium, is also typically high in iron and manganese and other trace metals, as well as more acidic, so that the materials handling plan suggested will pay extra dividends. FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 35 of 37 Attachment H WEST VIRGINIA's MANGANESE RELIEF PROTOCOL June 5, 1997 I. Eligibility. With the goal of optimizing conditions for aquatic life at certain mine sites, the following protocol is suggested for determining eligibility for manganese ( Mn) limit modifications to an NPDES permit. Be aware, that existing guidelines addressing alkaline mine drainage and post mining are still in effect. Therefore, please consult with your regional NPDES permit writer as to which set of guidelines best serve your situation. Furthermore, regular meetings shall be held with the regional permit writer throughout this process ( see attached flow chart).

A. Required Outlet Status. These modifications will be granted only to post mining sites: surface mines, refuse areas, loadouts. Post mining deep mine discharges are not eligible, as per 40 CFR 434.

B. Intake Water Testing. Testing will be done on six ( 6) months of raw intake water that will establish a representative sample and a median Mn level that is to be used as a benchmark for any additional tests. After the median Mn level is established a fairly large sample must be collected of the intake with the Mn at or above the median level. The large sample will then be used to do a variety of treatability and toxicity testing at various pH levels. If the effluent is shown to remain toxic despite Mn relief the application will be denied so further testing would be useless. If at the elevated levels of Mn are not shown to be toxic then temporary Mn relief could be granted while further studies are conducted on the benthics of the receiving stream. Details of the requirements of each type of testing are shown below.

1. A raw water study of six ( 6) monthly samples must be completed to determine the characteristics of a representative sample. Samples are to be taken monthly and consecutively until six ( 6) samples have been obtained. " No Flows" are not to be counted as samples. The median of these samples shall be calculated for the Mn concentration. ( All future tests dealing with intake water for the treatability and toxic screening shall be done on a sample with a Mn concentration equal to or greater than the median level.) The initial samples are to be analyzed for the following parameters: ( a) Manganese ( b) Conductivity ( c) Hardness ( d) Acidity ( e) Alkalinity ( f) Iron ( Fe) ( g) Aluminum ( Al) FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 36 of 37 2. Intake water, at median or above Mn levels, shall then be analyzed for eligibity by performing Treatability Tests at the pHs of 6.0, 7.5, and 9.0. The chemical reagent used for pH adjustment must be the same reagent that is used on site. The following parameters will be determined at each pH level with " Total" and " Disolved" metals both being performed only on the " Raw Water", and " Dissolved" metals only will be performed on the pH adjusted waters:

( a) Manganese ( b) Conductivity ( c) Hardness ( d) Acidity ( e) Alkalinity ( f) Iron ( Fe) ( g) Aluminum ( Al) ( h) Un ionized Ammonia ( where anhydrous ammonia is used as a reagent)

3. Intake water, at the adjusted pH levels: 6.0, 7.5, 9.0, ( and the upper pH variance limit in the permit if it is greater than 9.0), shall then have a 24 hour toxic screening performed on it. If this toxic screening and/ or other factors indicate that the effluent will remain toxic despite Mn relief, further testing is superfluous.

4. If the toxic screening is positive a preliminary Benthic Study shall be conducted at this time to establish a base line for invertebrate aquatic life. All benthic studies are to be conducted in at least two ( 2) sites to provide, as much as possible, a control representing the unaffected portion of the stream prior to the discharge point. Each site shall be evaluated with the reasonable goal of habitat and aquatic life improvement.

II. Permit Modification. If results of the Eligibility Tests and Toxic Screening so indicate, the next step is to submit your test data with a letter requesting a compliance schedule for testing of the outlet. Each site is to be judged on a case by case basis. While unfavorable results from the Eligibility Tests and Toxic Screening would preclude modifying the permit for Mn, favorable results do not mandate such modification. All other factors are to be considered by the Agency, including Title 46, Series 1 Legislative Rules.

A. Compliance Schedule will be issued with a ninety ( 90) day time frame with the following conditions.

1. pH limits of 6.0  9.0 will be maintained.

2. Manganese limits will be " Report Only".

3. Bioassay ( toxicity testing) on the discharge. ( a) All sampling and testing performed at this stage must be done during typical " base flow" conditions. FINAL DRAFT Coal Mining August 12, 2004 Page 37 of 37 ( b) Bioassay tests shall be performed in accordance with EPA/ 600/ 4 90/ 027F.

B. Modification. Should the results of the bioassay indicate that the effluent is toxic to aquatic life, the permit shall remain as it was prior to the compliance schedule being granted. Otherwise, the permit will be modified again with a three ( 3) year Compliance Schedule.

1. If discharge point under study has a pH variance it will be revoked and pH limits will be modified to 6.0 through 9.0.

2. Manganese will be modified to " Report Only".

3. Semi annual benthic monitoring on the receiving stream. ( a) At a minimum, one benthic survey station will be established downstream of the discharge point. ( b) Benthic surveys shall be conducted according to EPA No. 444/ 4 89 001 May 1989.

NOTE: Further toxicity testing studies may be needed on a case by case basis. All tests must be performed by laboratories certified in the testing procedure involved.

All sampling locations must be mutually agreed upon by the permittee and WVDEP personnel.


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 154 (Friday, August 13, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44671-44674]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16968]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0632; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASW-11]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of J-8 and V-140, and Establishment of T-422
in the Vicinity of Kingfisher, OK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Jet Route J-8 and VHF
Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal airway V-140, and establish Area
Navigation (RNAV) route T-422 in the vicinity of Kingfisher, OK. The
Air Traffic Service (ATS) route modifications are necessary due to the
planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Kingfisher, OK, VOR/
Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC) navigational aid (NAVAID) which
provides navigational guidance for portions of J-8 and V-140. The VOR
portion of the VORTAC is being decommissioned as part of the FAA's VOR
Minimum Operational Network (MON) program.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 27, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone:
(800) 647-5527, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2021-0632; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASW-11 at the beginning of your
comments. You

may also submit comments through the internet at https://www.regulations.gov. FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at
https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information,
you can contact the Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Order is also available for inspection
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it would modify the route structure as necessary to
preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National
Airspace System (NAS).

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2021-0632; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASW-11) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to FAA Docket No. FAA-2021-0632; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASW-11.'' The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified comment
closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the comment
closing date. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Operations Support Group, Central
Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 10101 Hillwood
Parkway, Fort Worth, TX, 76177.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective
September 15, 2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

Background

    The FAA is planning decommissioning activities for the VOR portion
of the Kingfisher, OK, VORTAC in May 2022. The VOR portion of the
Kingfisher, OK, VORTAC is a candidate VOR identified for discontinuance
by the FAA's VOR MON program and listed in the final policy statement
notice, ``Provision of Navigation Services for the Next Generation Air
Transportation System (NextGen) Transition to Performance-Based
Navigation (PBN) (Plan for Establishing a VOR Minimum Operational
Network),'' published in the Federal Register of July 26, 2016 (81 FR
48694), Docket No. FAA-2011-1082.
    Although the VOR portion of the Kingfisher VORTAC is planned for
decommissioning, the co-located DME portion of the NAVAID is being
retained to support Performance Based Navigation (PBN) procedures.
    The existing ATS route dependencies to the Kingfisher, OK, VORTAC
NAVAID are Jet Route J-8 and VOR Federal airway V-140. With the planned
decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Kingfisher, OK, VORTAC, the
remaining ground-based NAVAID coverage in the area is insufficient to
enable the continuity of these affected ATS routes. As such, proposed
modifications to the routes would result in the creation of a gap in J-
8 and the creation of two gaps in V-140.
    To overcome the proposed gaps in the routes, instrument flight
rules (IFR) traffic could use adjacent ATS routes, including Jet Routes
J-6, J-14, J-20, J-78, and J-98 in lieu of the affected J-8 segment and
VOR Federal airways V-14, V-272, V-436, and V-440 in lieu of the
affected V-140 segment or receive air traffic control (ATC) radar
vectors to fly through or circumnavigate the affected area.
Additionally, IFR pilots equipped with RNAV capabilities could also
navigate point to point using the existing fixes that will remain in
place to support continued operations though the affected area. Visual
flight rules (VFR) pilots who elect to navigate via the airways through
the affected area could also take advantage of the adjacent VOR Federal
airways or ATC services listed previously.
    Further, the FAA proposes to establish an RNAV route T-422 between
the Panhandle, TX, VORTAC and the Tulsa, OK, VORTAC to, in part,
mitigate the proposed removal of the V-140 airway segment affected by
the planned decommissioning of the Kingfisher VOR. Also, establishing
T-422 would provide RNAV routing capability between the Amarillo, TX,
area

eastward to the Tulsa, OK, area; as well as, support ongoing FAA
NextGen efforts to transition the NAS to performance-based navigation.
    Prior to this NPRM, the FAA published a rule for Docket No. FAA-
2020-0654 in the Federal Register (85 FR 79425; December 10, 2020),
amending VOR Federal airway V-140 by removing the airway segment
between the London, KY, VOR/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) and
the Bluefield, WV, VOR/DME. That airway amendment, effective February
25, 2021, is included in this NPRM.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 by modifying
Jet Route J-8 and VOR Federal airway V-140, and establishing RNAV route
T-422. The planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of the
Kingfisher, OK, VORTAC has made this action necessary.
    The proposed Jet route change is outlined below.
    J-8: J-8 currently extends between the Needles, CA, VORTAC and the
Casanova, VA, VORTAC. The FAA proposes to remove the route segment
overlying the Kingfisher, OK, VORTAC between the Borger, TX, VORTAC and
the Springfield, MO, VORTAC. The unaffected portions of the existing
route would remain as charted.
    The proposed VOR Federal airway change is outlined below.
    V-140: V-140 currently extends between the Panhandle, TX, VORTAC
and the London, KY, VOR/DME; and between the Bluefield, WV, VOR/DME and
the Casanova, VA, VORTAC. The FAA proposes to remove the airway segment
overlying the Kingfisher, OK, VORTAC between the Burns Flat, OK, VORTAC
and the Tulsa, OK, VORTAC. The unaffected portions of the existing
airway would remain as charted.
    The proposed new RNAV T-route is outlined below.
    T-422: T-422 is a proposed new route that would extend between the
Panhandle, TX, VORTAC and the Tulsa, OK, VORTAC. This RNAV route would
mitigate the proposed loss of the V-140 airway segment proposed to be
removed (above) between the Burns Flat, OK, VORTAC and the Tulsa, OK,
VORTAC and provide RNAV routing capability between the Amarillo, TX,
area and the Tulsa, OK, area.
    All of the NAVAID radials listed in the ATS route descriptions
below are unchanged and stated in True degrees.
    Jet routes are published in paragraph 2004, VOR Federal airways are
published in paragraph 6010(a), and United States RNAV T-routes are
published in paragraph 6011 of FAA Order 7400.11E, dated July 21, 2020,
and effective September 15, 2020, which is incorporated by reference in
14 CFR 71.1. The ATS routes listed in this document would be published
subsequently in the Order.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule,
when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and
effective September 15, 2020, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 2004 Jet Routes.

* * * * *

J-8 [Amended]

    From Needles, CA; Flagstaff, AZ; Gallup, NM; Fort Union, NM; to
Borger, TX. From Springfield, MO; St Louis, MO; Louisville, KY;
Charleston, WV; INT Charleston 092[deg] and Casanova, VA, 253[deg]
radials; to Casanova.
* * * * *

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-140 [Amended]

    From Panhandle, TX; to Burns Flat, OK. From Tulsa, OK;
Razorback, AR; Harrison, AR; Walnut Ridge, AR; Dyersburg, TN;
Nashville, TN; Livingston, TN; to London, KY. From Bluefield, WV;
INT Bluefield 071[deg] and Montebello, VA, 250[deg] radials;
Montebello; to Casanova, VA.
* * * * *

Paragraph 6011 United States Area Navigation Routes.

* * * * *

T422 Panhandle, TX (PNH) to Tulsa, OK (TUL) [New]

Panhandle, TX (PNH)                          VORTAC                         (Lat. 35[deg]14'06.22'' N, long. 101[deg]41'56.51'' W)
Burns Flat, OK (BFV)                         VORTAC                         (Lat. 35[deg]14'13.00'' N, long. 099[deg]12'22.20'' W)
BISKT, OK                                    WP                             (Lat. 35[deg]48'18.66'' N, long. 098[deg]00'14.73'' W)

LASTS, OK                                    FIX                            (Lat. 35[deg]59'45.23'' N, long. 097[deg]16'24.76'' W)
GULLI, OK                                    FIX                            (Lat. 36[deg]00'43.02'' N, long. 097[deg]08'39.63'' W)
Tulsa, OK (TUL)                              VORTAC                         (Lat. 36[deg]11'46.51'' N, long. 095[deg]47'17.13'' W)

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 4, 2021.
George Gonzalez,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2021-16968 Filed 8-12-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P