[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 58 (Wednesday, March 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16787-16789]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06540]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP14-70-000]

National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; Notice of Intent To Prepare
an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed West Side Expansion and
Modernization Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the West Side Expansion and
Modernization Project (Project) involving construction and operation of
facilities by National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation (National Fuel) in
Washington, Allegheny, Beaver, Venango, and Mercer Counties,
Pennsylvania. The Commission will use this EA in its decision-making
process to determine whether the project is in the public convenience
and necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the
Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested
agencies on the project. Your input will help the Commission staff
determine what issues they need to evaluate in the EA. Please note that
the scoping period will close on April 18, 2014. You may submit
comments in written form. Details on how to submit written comments are
in the Public Participation section of this notice.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives should notify their constituents of this proposed
project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a pipeline company
representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to
construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities. The company
would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement. However, if
the Commission approves the project, that approval conveys with it the
right of eminent domain. Therefore, if easement negotiations fail to
produce an agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation
proceedings where compensation would be determined in accordance with
state law.
    National Fuel provided landowners with a fact sheet prepared by the
FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do
I Need To Know?'' This fact sheet addresses a number of typically-asked
questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate
in the Commission's proceedings. It is also available for viewing on
the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov).

Summary of the Proposed Project

    National Fuel proposes to construct a new transmission line
parallel to its existing natural gas pipeline referred to as Line N.
The pipeline would replace about 23 miles of the existing 20-inch-
diameter Line N (referred to as Sections 1 and 2) which were built in
1947, with new 24-inch pipeline located in Washington, Allegheny and
Beaver Counties, PA. The Project also consists of the installation of
additional compression at the Mercer Compressor Station (CS) (ongoing
construction under CP13-530) in Mercer County, PA and miscellaneous
piping modifications at the Henderson CS in Venango County, PA. The
Project would provide about 175,000 dekatherms per day of incremental
capacity. According to National Fuel, the project would improve the
integrity and reliability of the existing Line N system.
    The West Side Expansion and Modernization Project would consist of
the following facilities:
     Installation of approximately 23-miles of 24-inch diameter
pipeline;
     construction of one additional 3,550 horsepower (HP)
reciprocating compressor unit at the National Fuel existing Mercer CS;
and
     installation of miscellaneous valve and piping
modifications at the National Fuel existing Henderson CS.
    The general location of the project facilities is shown in appendix
1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The appendices referenced in this notice will not appear in
the Federal Register. Copies of appendices were sent to all those
receiving this notice in the mail and are available at www.ferc.gov
using the link called ``eLibrary'' or from the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, or call
(202) 502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to
the last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the proposed facilities would disturb about 3.0
acres of land for the aboveground facilities, 275.7 acres for temporary
construction of the pipeline. Following construction, National Fuel
would maintain about 139.7 acres for permanent operation of the
project's facilities. The remaining acreage would be restored and
revert to former uses. National Fuel proposes to construct the new 24-
inch pipeline parallel to the existing Line N pipeline.

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
\2\ to discover and address concerns the public may have about
proposals. This process is referred to as ``scoping.'' The main goal of
the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public
comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. We will
consider all

filed comments during the preparation of the EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``We,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the EA we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of
the construction and operation of the proposed project under these
general headings:
     Geology and soils;
     land use;
     water resources, fisheries, and wetlands;
     cultural resources;
     vegetation and wildlife;
     air quality and noise;
     endangered and threatened species; and
     public safety.
    We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed
project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to
lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    The EA will present our independent analysis of the issues. The EA
will be available in the public record at www.ferc.gov using the link
called ``eLibrary''. Depending on the comments received during the
scoping process, we may also publish and distribute the EA to the
public for an allotted comment period. We will consider all comments on
the EA before making our recommendations to the Commission. To ensure
we have the opportunity to consider and address your comments, please
carefully follow the instructions in the Public Participation section
beginning on page 4.
    With this notice, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction by law
and/or special expertise with respect to the environmental issues of
this project to formally cooperate with us in the preparation of the
EA.\3\ Agencies that would like to request cooperating agency status
should follow the instructions for filing comments provided under the
Public Participation section of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Council on Environmental Quality regulations addressing
cooperating agency responsibilities are at Title 40, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 1501.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, we are using this notice to initiate consultation
with the applicable State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and to
solicit their views and those of other government agencies, interested
Indian tribes, and the public on the project's potential effects on
historic properties.\4\ We will define the project-specific Area of
Potential Effects (APE) in consultation with the SHPO as the project
develops. On natural gas facility projects, the APE at a minimum
encompasses all areas subject to ground disturbance (examples include
construction right-of-way, contractor/pipe storage yards, compressor
stations, and access roads). Our EA for this project will document our
findings on the impacts on historic properties and summarize the status
of consultations under section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 800. Those
regulations define historic properties as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the project. Your comments should focus on
the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and
measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific
your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your
comments are timely and properly recorded, please send your comments so
that the Commission receives them in Washington, DC on or before April
18, 2014.
    For your convenience, there are three methods which you can use to
submit your comments to the Commission. In all instances please
reference the project docket number (CP14-70-000) with your submission.
The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert
staff available to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for interested persons to
submit brief, text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically using the eFiling
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a
variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission.
New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on
``eRegister.'' You must select the type of filing you are making. If
you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select
``Comment on a Filing''; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC
20426.

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's
regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property
may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within
certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits
comments on the project. We will update the environmental mailing list
as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related
to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and
government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the
proposed project.
    If we publish and distribute the EA, copies will be sent to the
environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you would
prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD
version or would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please
return the attached Information Request (appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an ``intervenor'' which is an official party to the
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the
process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard
by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling.
An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a
request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are in
the User's Guide under the ``e-filing'' link on the Commission's Web
site.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC Web site at www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the docket number,
excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP14-
70). Be sure you have

selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC
Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at (866) 208-
3676, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also
provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the
Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

    Dated: March 19, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-06540 Filed 3-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


1 Environmental Fate Prepared for:

Regulatory Management Branch II Antimicrobial Division Office of Pesticide Programs U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Arlington, VA 22202 Prepared by:

Risk Assessment and Science Branch Antimicrobial Division Office of Pesticide Programs U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Arlington, VA 22202 2 Executive Summary The major exposure from the use of chromated and non chromated arsenical wood preservatives is to three environmental compartments: soil / sediments, surface and ground water contamination and bioaccumulation in the aquatic and benthic organisms. This chapter will address the environmental fate of arsenic and chromium from wood treated with chromated and non chromated arsenical wood preservatives. The environmental fate of zinc, which leaches from wood treated with ACZA, was previously addressed in the Zinc Salts RED ( Case 4099, August, 1992). Although copper is included in the discussion of some of the individual studies used in this assessment, below, the overall environmental fate of copper will be addressed in the forthcoming Copper RED.

The leaching of arsenic and chromium into water from pressure treated wood has been widely investigated and both the laboratory and field studies. These studies generally indicate that leaching of the metals is a function of pH, salinity ( fresh water, sea water, estuaries, natural and synthetic, sterile buffered water), temperature, moisture content of the treated wood, wood type, and wood texture. It has been observed that most of the leaching takes place in the first few days after the application. Most of these studies have shown that the extent and rate of leaching is: As> Cr. Available studies were conducted under different conditions and the exact concentrations of preseravtive solution absorbed by wood ( e. g. utility poles) are not known. Sorption constants of these metals are high for various soils. Leaching of the metals into soils also depends on the pH of the soil, type and texture of the soils, organic content of the soils; however, studies on sorption into soils from utility poles have shown that the release of metals into soils/ sediments from the base of treated wood, decks or utility poles or from the pressure treatment facilities, does not show a high degree of downward or ground level migration. In most cases, after migration of the metals a few meters down into soil, these metals attain the background level concentration of soil. Chromium is released into water and soil as Cr( III), but the concentration of Cr( III) is lower than arsernic, partly due to the fixation process in the wood structure. Arsenic is leached into soil and water as As( V).

In general, the metals in water exist as hydrated species ( coordinated with water), or hydroxy species or the metal is bound to inorganic anions like FeF 6  3, or bonded to organic ligands to form metal complexes or as organometallics ( contains C Metal bonds). Fate and transport processes, and interaction with aquatic and benthic organisms by these chemical species will vary from one of type of organism to another. The metals from CCA when released into water systems usually attain background concentrations. In view of the fact that the metals attain background level concentrations in soil and water, and the tendency of the metals to speciate, it is hard to ascertain the source of contamination in water and soil. Considering absence of comprehensive ground water monitoring relative to the leaching of metals from CCA into soils and water, it appears no significant possibility exists for ground water contamination in areas where utility poles have been placed and where decks have been built. 3 Environmental Fate Assessment Chromium and arsenic as oxides are two of the active ingredients of the water borne wood preservative chromated copper arsenate ( CCA). As a wood preservative it is unique in more than one way. First, it is a mixture of inorganics metal species. Second, its efficacy as a wood preservative improves if, and when, it goes through the ` fixation' process during wood pressure treatment.

The physical properties and the chemistry of the three metals ( arsenic, chromium and copper) of the water borne wood preservative CCA are very well understood in aqueous and soil compartments. Most of the Agency's environmental fate guideline studies ( hydrolysis, photolysis, soil aquatic metabolism, etc.) cannot be conducted on the individual, or a mixture of these, metallic actives due to their complex interactions with soil and water.

Chromium is a transition metals and has a tendency to exist in variable oxidation states in water and soils. Common oxidation states of chromium are Cr( III) and Cr( VI). Arsenic is a metalloid ( shows the characteristics of both a metal and a non metal) and also has a tendency to exist in variable oxidation states. Common oxidation states of arsenic are As( III) and As( V). In addition, the pH of aqueous media or soil, nature of soil ( texture of soil, percent of organic carbon of the soil, etc.), salinity of water, temperature of water, and soil are some of the factors that give rise to the phenomenon of chemical speciation ( formation of different metal species) which is a common phenomenon in these environmental compartments. Because of these parameters, the metal ions can form soluble or insoluble substance which can be cationic or anionic species or full simple molecules or complex compounds. In general, these metal ions exist in water and soil as:

A. A free metal ion, which in aqueous medium is aquated ( solvated or complexed with water molecules); B. Simple inorganic species like oxides, hydroxides, halides, carbonates etc.; or C. Complexed with organic and inorganic ligands.

Chromium:

Cr( II) is unstable in water. Cr( III) goes through hydrolysis and forms various species. The important species of Cr( III) found in aqueous systems are: CrOH+ 2, Cr( OH) 2 +, Cr( OH) 4 , Cr( OH) 3( s). In addition, polymeric species like: Cr 2( OH) 2 and Cr 3( OH) 4 + 5 are also formed in water. All these species are present in aqueous systems in the absence of any complexing agents. Similarly, Cr( VI) also hydrolyzes in water and forms CrO 4  2,( at pH > 6.5), and HCrO 4  and Cr 2 O 7  2 in acidic medium. In fresh water at pH 6 species detected are: HCrO 4 , Cr( OH)+ 2, Cr( OH) 2 +, CrO 4  2, Cr+ 3 and Cr( OH) 3( s). On the other hand, the species detected in sea water at pH 8 are: CrO 4  2, Cr( OH)+ 2, Cr( OH) 3, NaCrO 4 , Cr( OH)+ 2, Cr( OH) 4 , KCrO 4 , HCrO 4  . Cr( III) is kinetically stable and Cr( VI) is thermodynamically stable in aqueous medium. Cr( VI) is more water soluble, and more mobile and can easily move through wet soils into ground water and may become more bioavailable. ( Lebow, S. 1996). The half life of Cr( III) in water has been estimated from being 4 one month to 20 months and this shows persistency of the metal ( Pettine, M. and F. J. Millero, 1990)

Chromium goes through oxidation reduction reactions when sorbed in soils. Organic matter in soils, which has a high sorption capacity for chromium, reduces Cr( VI) to Cr( III) spontaneously. Manganese oxides in the soils, on the other hand, oxidize Cr( III) to Cr( VI). Chromate and dichromate ions form soluble salts and increase the mobility of toxic Cr( VI) in soils. Chromium as Cr( VI) reduces to Cr( III) under anoxic conditions. In water at neutral conditions ( pH 7), formation of dichromate ions ( chromium as Cr( VI)) is minimized. Cr( VI) is adsorbed less and less by hydrous metal oxides and soils as the alkalinity of the medium increases. The presence of anions like sulfate and phosphate decrease the sorption phenomenon. At low pH and low concentrations of chromium, however, adsorption of Cr( III) on iron and manganese oxides increases.

Arsenic:

The common and important arsenic ores are: tenantite, cobaltite, arsenopyrite, niccolite and enargite. Arsenic has a great tendency to sorb to soils and sediments. Its sorption capacity ( µ g total As/ g soil) with silty fine sand with little clay ranges from 1.0 to 252. For brown clay sand it is between 1.0 to 80.0 and with fine sand the sorption capacity varies from 1.1 to 7.9. Arsenic sorption is dependent on pH, redox conditions, competing anions, salinity and clay content and hydrous oxide content ( aluminum or iron). Arsenic mobility in clay soils is low to moderate. As( V) under proper conditions can reduce to As( III). In aerobic and anaerobic sediments, arsenate is more strongly sorbed than methylarsenic acid ( Holm, R. T. 1979; Wauchope, R. D. 1975).

As the sorption of arsenic decreases with rising pH, the mobility of arsenic increases. Organoarsenates decrease the sorption of arsenic and increase the arsenic mobility Organoarsenates are more mobile than arsenic. Arsenic mobility in clay soils is low to moderate. However, in loamy and sandy soils, mobility increases ( 6 10 cm/ day for loamy sand). Between pH 2 and 11, the common species of arsenic present in aqueous medium are: H 2 AsO 4  and HAsO 4 2. Beyond pH 12, it is mostly HAsO 3 2 and AsO 3  3.

Fixation:

Fixation is a chemical process which consists of a series of chemical reactions that ensue after the wood has been pressure treated with CCA. Fixation precedes the actual ` action' of CCA to act as a wood preservative. It depends on a number of parameters: temperature, humidity ( moisture content of the wood), pH and drying period for the wood after the pressure treatment has been completed. Under laboratory conditions, increasing concentration of the wood preservative will lower the pH of the solution mixture and will accelerate the rate of fixation ( Anderson, A. G. 1990). 5 The process of fixation consists of a series of chemical reactions:

First, ` an initial reaction' of absorption of the preservative to the cellulosic and lignin components of the wood. Second, a primary precipitation reaction which converts Cr( VI) to Cr( III) and this process continues for the duration of fixation period. Lastly, the conversion of copper arsenate into basic copper arsenate ( Anderson, A. G. 1990).

Earlier research on the temperature effect on the fixation process on scot pine and beech showed that increased fixation occurs when the temperature was raised to 30 oC and that the maximum fixation was attained in 42 hours ( Wilson, A. 1971). In another study on fixation ( Cooper, et al. 1992), it was shown that for western red cedar the fixation process was best achieved at 70 oC and 93% relative humidity within 14.3 hours. For douglas fir, red pine, lodge pole pine, southern pine and jack pine the fixation at the same temperature and humidity conditions was best achieved between 5.9 to 8.3 hours. In a study on red pine it was shown a freshly treated wood when freezed dried and reequilibrated with moisture, reduction of Cr( VI) to Cr( III) took place even at low moisture contents or even at over dried conditions ( Kaldas, M. and P. A. Cooper, 1996).

Another series of studies on hemlock, grand fir, white fir, noble fir, pacific silver fir and douglas fir showed when the wood samples were removed as the drying process was on, and systemically treated with CCA by a full cell process, the treatability and penetration of CCA into the wood depended on the drying rate ( Lebow et al., 1996). In a related study, it was shown that the fixation process is temperature dependent ( McNamara W., 1989).

In another study, the fixation rate of commercially available CCA on sawdust, measured by arsenic leaching, showed that at about 20 o C, 98 99% CCA was fixated by day five. The same study also showed that as the fixation process proceeds, the pH of the preservative rises ( Dalhgren S. E., 1972). Another study showed that rate of fixation also depended on the type of wood ( Wilson A., 1971).

The process of fixation has been traditionally looked upon as the fixation of Cr( VI) changing into Cr( III) in the wood tissues. A recent work on southern pine, jack pine, and red pine has indicated that copper and arsenic components are stabilized ( fixated) earlier than chromium ( Cooper et al., 1996).

Special Leaching or Aqueous Availability:

The leaching of CCA metals and subsequent entrance of these metal ions into environmental compartments ( water, soil, plants, and animals) is an important process for environmental fate and transport assessment. A very earlier work on leaching of CCA was done on the wood used in residential houses to build foundations and this study showed no significant leaching of CCA components and the conclusion drawn at that time was that there was no environmental hazard to the ground water, soil, plants or animals ( Arsenault, R. D., 1975). Later 6 studies have not only contradicted this observation but have elucidated the mechanisms of leaching and also estimate the amounts of leaching of CCA metals from the treated wood.

To elucidate the leaching mechanism of arsenic from CCA treated wood, an extensive study was carried out in the presence and absence of electrolytes. This leaching study was conducted with a simulated rainfall ( rain intensity: 1 ± 0.15 inch/ hour). Southern pine, kiln dried plywood specimen ( 29.2 cm x 29.2 cm x 1.9 cm) were selected and treated with 4% CCA solutions ( CCA A, B and C) in the presence and absence of electrolytes. The mean absorption of the preservation solution was 17.12 pounds per cubic feet ( pcf). Initially water runoff and soil leachate samples were collected after 15, 30, 45 and 60 minutes of simulated rainfall and then after 3, 9 and 27 hours of rainfall.

After the simulated rainfall, it was determined that plywood samples showed a significant decline of arsenic on one face of the plywood from 3.23 mg/ g to 1.441 mg/ g and on the other face from 3.23 mg/ g to 1.22 mg/ g. Analysis of the soils ( sand and loam) revealed that the amounts of arsenic were not different for the soil in contact with the treated plywood sample than the soils in contact with untreated ( blank) plywood. The amounts of arsenic in the surface water runoff was depended on the texture of the soil and the time of exposure to the rainfall. Runoff samples collected after one hour of simulated rainfall did not show the presence of arsenic. The samples of CCA C in the presence of the electrolyte ( sodium dichromate and copper sulfate) indicated the highest arsenic absorption to the wood but also the highest leaching. The surface water runoff collected from the loam soil had a higher concentration of arsenic ( 44.5 µ g/ L) but in the sand the amount of arsenic was only 7.3 µ g/ L. The concentration of arsenic increased dramatically for the first three hours of rainfall and then slowly decreased thereafter. The soil leachates from the sand after the first hour of rainfall with the CCA B ( non electrolytic) showed the higher concentration of arsenic ( 98.6 µ g/ L) but with CCA C ( electrolytic) the amount was 61.3 µ g/ l. Loam soil leachates for CCA B ( non electrolytic) showed the presence of 11.9 µ g/ L arsenic and for CCA C ( electrolytic) the arsenic amount was 22.2 µ g/ L. ( Chen and Walters, 1979).

In another study, it was shown that from the southern pine wood the metals from CCA leached much more from the high temperature pressure treated kiln dried wood than the air dried pressure treated wood.( Less et al., 1993).

A leaching study conducted on southern pine, pressure treated with CCA C wood preservative, was submittted by the registrants to the Agency. The study was carried out at three pHs: 5, 7 and 9, in 0.10M HCl and in simulated sea water which was prepared according to the ASTM Method D1141 90. The southern pine blocks ( 3.8 cm x 3.8 cm x 29 cm) were pressure treated upto 0.80 pounds per cubic feet ( pcf) for the studies in pHs 5,7 and in 0.10 M HCl while the for simulated sea water, the blocks were pressure treated upto 2.5 pounds per cubic feet ( pcf). The pressure treatment was carried out according to the AWPA Standards. The study was conducted for 60 days altogether. The amounts of the metal ions leaching was found highest with 0.10 M HCl solutions: total arsenic leaching in 0.10M HCl on day 1 was 170 µ g/ cm2/ day and it declined to 27 µ g ( day 30). However, when arsenic was examined in its two common oxidation 7 states, As( III) leached at a rate of 10 µ g/ cm2/ day ( day 21) and it increased to 38 µ g/ cm2/ day on day 30 while for As( V), the rate was 10 µ g/ cm2/ day on day 21 and it increased to 22 µ g/ cm2/ day on day 30. The rate of leaching for Cu( II) in 0.10M HCl was 149 µ g/ cm2/ day on day 1 and declined to 22 µ g/ cm2/ day on day 30. The rate of leaching for total Cr in the in presence of 0.10M HCl was 46 µ g/ cm2/ day for day 5 and declined to 30 µ g/ cm2/ day on day 30. When analyzed for Cr( VI), the leaching rate in 0.10M HCl was 1.5 µ g/ cm2/ day for day 21 and reduced to 1.0 µ g/ cm2/ day for day 30 ( Stanley, J. S., 1994).

In a 40 day study conducted in Canada on the pressure treated jack pine with CCA at various pHs of 3.5, 4.5, 5.5, 7.0 and 8.5 and also in a solution containing dilute sulfuric acid ( 0.10N). The pressure treated blocks were separated into two sets: One set was kept in open air for one year to simulate ` weathering'. The second set of blocks were kept in house to simulate ` new conditions'. All blocks were of uniform dimensions of 5 cm2. The preservation retention of the blocks was close to but not exactly like CCA C ( the recommended level by AWPA Standards is 0.40 pcf ( 6.4 kg/ m3).

` Weathered' blocks leached copper significantly more at pH 3.5, 4.5 and 5.5 than the ` fresh' blocks. Release of chromium was less at pH 3.5 and 4.5. Arsenic showed a higher release rate at pH 5. Generally, the leaching order was Cu > As> Cr. It is recognized that fixation of chromium ( conversion of Cr( VI) to Cr( III) ) prevents the leaching of chromium from the wood. The pHs in this study were maintained using citric acid/ NaOH mixture solutions, and in distilled water a pH of 7 was maintained. The borax/ HCl solution resulted in pH 8.5. A similar trend was observed when the leaching was conducted in dilute sulfuric acid solution at pHs 2.5, 3.5 and 4.5 ( preservation retention was 0.13 pcf ( 1.99 kg/ m3) ( Warner, J. E. & K. R. Solomon, 1990).

A 13 day study on leaching from douglas fir, redpine, lodgepole fir and western red cedar, pressure treated with 2.3% CCA showed and confirmed that the presence of citric acid/ NaOH buffer increases the rate of leaching from the wood at a high pHs like pH 7. ( Cooper, P. A., 1991).

A twelve month study was conducted on leaching of CCA C metals from pressure treated jack pine wood with 1.8% CCA C treatment solution and a preservative retention of 0.40 pcf ( 6.4 kg/ m3 ). In this study, the CCA metals from these pressure treated wood blocks were leached into four different compartments: leaching into distilled water, leaching into natural weathering conditions, leaching into soil burial and leaching into compost ( made by vegetable matter). It was observed that leaching into compost was higher than into other compartments: 13% leaching was observed in the compost, in soil burial it was 1.3%, weathering sample showed about a 1.5% leaching and leaching into distilled water was about 5%. Leaching order, however, was the same as with other studies: Cu> As> Cr. ( Cooper et al., 1992).

A similar 21 day leaching study with southern pine sapwood, pressure treated with 1.03% CCA C with preservative retention of 0.3 pcf ( 4.8 kg/ m3 ) showed a leaching rate of 1 µ g/ cm2/ day for Cu and As and 0.01 µ g/ cm2/ day for Cr which is the same trend ( copper

arsenic 8 > chromium) as other leaching studies have shown ( Merkle, et al., 1993).

In an Australian Study, Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service ( M. Comfort, Scientific Rep. 93/ 1, 1993), conducted a leaching study on Southern Tasmanian boardwalks ( ages 1 to 14 years) which were the pressure treated with CCA. Soil samples collected about 6 inches and a few meters away form the boardwalks showed that the chromium ( 88 ppm) and copper levels ( 49 ppm) in the close proximity samples were high compared to the distant ones which were not different from the blank samples. The blank samples showed chromium at 20 ppm and copper between 1 3 ppm. The ages of the boardwalks did appear to contribute in the high levels of the metals.

In a European study ( Italy), on CCA leaching from treated wood, rain water was used for extraction. CCA treated wood samples from a post were meshed through a 5 mesh, 25 springs/ cm2 sieve. The coarse powder so obtained was digested in 96% sulfuric acid and 3% hydrogen peroxide in a 5: 1 ratio and the analyses showed the presence of As ( 1.602 mg/ g), Cr( 1.345 mg/ g) and Cu( 0.813 mg/ g). Before the extraction, rainwater which was collected in Turin in 1994, was analyzed for the presence of anions and cations including As, Cr and Cu and the amounts of these respectively were: 0.068, 0.029 and 0.021( all in mg/ L). This rainwater was then used to extract the coarse powder and the leachates were collected at different times, the last one was 78 hour leachate. The 78 hour extraction sample contained As and Cr ( 50 µ g/ g) and Cu( 150 µ g/ g). The same study also conducted the extractions at pHs 6 down to 3. Maximum amounts of metal ions were released at pH 3. A similar trend was observed in another study. The CCA solution used in the study was purchased commercially and in the stock solution each metal ion was about 1000mg/ L from which running samples were prepared ( Aceto, M. and A. Fedele, 1994).

In a study in simulated sea water, it was observed that copper leached into water from pressure treated full sized pilings at 529 mg level and arsenic level was measured at 60 mg and little or no chromium was measurable ( Baldwin et al., 1994).

In a freshwater study on the old lockgates and freshly constructed lockgates of pressure treated wood with CCA the copper concentrations ( 200 ppb) were high at the newly constructed lockgates, 40 meters downstream, while the concentrations of copper were low at the old lockgates ( 40 ppb). Chromium concentrations were the same ( 90 ppb) at both locations while arsenic was 90 ppb level at the new lockgate and at 60 ppb level 40 meters downstream ( Cooper, P. A., 1991).

In another study, the leaching of the metals from CCA was investigated as the fixation process was in progress. It was carried out on the pole sections ( 8" x 2' diameter) of red pine poles which were pressure treated with CCA C of 1.7% and 3.5% concentrations as well as with pressure treated ( 1.5% CCA C) the jack pine boards ( 2" x 6" ). The study was conducted at 95% humidity and 60 o C. As the fixation process proceeds, the metals from the CCA C were extracted by 2 hour long spray of simulated rain ( rainfall: 150 mm). The concentrations of the 9 metal ions in the leachates progressively declined as chromium fixation process progressed. Arsenic stabilized ( fixed) faster than copper fixation which in turn was faster than chromium fixation. For red pine, pressure treated with 1.7% CCA C at 95% humidity and 60 o C, the preservation retention was 0.48 pcf ( 7.7 kg/ m3 ) and 1.02 pcf ( 16.4 kg/ m3 ) when the CCA C solution was 3.5%. The retention for jack pine, under the same humidity and temperature conditions, the preservation retention was 0.24 ( 3.9 kg/ m3 ) when the wood was pressure treated with 2 % CCA C solution.

For the red pine pole at both the preservation retentions of 0.48 and 1.02 pcf and 99.9% chromium fixation level, the leaching losses from the wood were: 4 µ g/ cm2 for Cr, 9 µ g/ cm2 for Cu and 3 µ g/ cm2 for As. For the jack pine wood, on the other hand, at 99.9% chromium fixation level, the leaching losses of the metal ions from the wood were: 0.28 µ g/ cm2 for Cr, 0.88 µ g/ cm2 for Cu and 0.62 µ g/ cm2 for As. The leaching losses continued to decline as the Cr( VI) fixation progressed from 60 70% to 99.9% level ( Cooper et. al, 1995).

A recent estuarine study on the southern yellow pine, pressure treated with CCA C, reaffirmed the results from previous studies that the leaching of the metal ions from the wood was highest for Cu and lowest for Cr. This study measured the laboratory leaching rates for copper, arsenic and chromium from the freshly pressure treated southern yellow pine as well as the actual loss of these metal ions from a weathered CCA C treated lumber which had been service for 14 years as a bulkhead in Sayville, New York, south shore estuarine canal. The retention level of the CCA C in this weathered bulkhead was between 0.61 pcf to 1.0 pcf ( 9.6 to 16.0 kg/ m3 ) as communicated by S. Roller Lumber Corp. This lumber from the canal was chosen as it had experienced 4 types of weathering: the wood surface at the water level ( air exposure), the wood surface exposed to tidal water off and on ( air/ water exposure), the wood surface continuously submerged in water ( water exposure) and last, the wood surface buried deep in the sediment below the canal. ( soil exposure). The CCA C retention level for the weathered lumber was 0.20 pcf ( 3.1 kg/ m3 ) for surface exposed to air, 0.30 pcf ( 5.0 kg/ m3 ) for the wood surface exposed to tidal water off and on, 0.068 pcf ( 1.1 kg/ m3 ) for the wood surface submerged under water and 0.60 pcf ( 9.9 kg/ m3 ) for the wood surface buried in the sediment. The leaching losses of the metal ions from these weathered surfaces were in the order of: subtidal ( wood surface exposed to air and water) > tidal ( wood surface submerged in water) > air > sediment. The extent of metal ions leaching was in the same order as the laboratory leaching studies: Cu > As > Cr.

The laboratory leaching study by the same group showed that the freshly pressure treated southern yellow pine ( CCA C), the leaching rates for the metal ions were: 5.71 17.78 µ g/ cm2/ day for Cu, 0.20 0.98 µ g/ cm2/ day for Cr and 0.15 0.90 µ g/ cm2/ day for As, for the initial 12 hour. This laboratory leaching study was conducted under saline conditions ( 3,13, and 26 ppt) which generally mimic the estuary conditions. The preservation retention level for CCA C in the southern yellow pine was between 0.29 pcf to 4.0 pcf ( 4.6 64.0 kg/ m3 ) when measured all over the wood. Overall, the preservation retention level, however, was 2.5 pcf ( 40.7 kg/ m3 ). The analysis of the metal ions in the leachates, expressed as the oxide ratio yielded: 48.8: 36: 15.4 10 ( CrO 3: As 2 O 5: CuO) which was very close to the actual ratio of 47.5: 34: 18.5 which is the recommended ratio by AWPA Standards. The Agency has noted that the retention level of CCAC under marine water, as recommended by AWPA, should be at least 2.5 pcf ( 40.7 kg/ m3 ). However, AWPA recommends that retention level southern yellow pine wood in some areas of the USA like north of New Jersey and north of San Francisco can be about 1.5 pcf ( 24 kg/ m3 ) ( . Breslin and Adler Ivanbrook, 1998).

Some laboratory and field studies have shown that the leaching process is aided by slow or drizzling rain than by heavy showers ( Evans, F. G., 1987; and Cockroft and Laidlaw, 1978).

Most of the leaching from the treated wood in the field and laboratory tests take place in the first few days after the application of the wood preservative. Leaching rates depend on the size of the wood, type of wood, fixation process. I has been shown that the round posts show a higher rate of leaching than the saw dust of the lumber. Hardwood leach more than softwood. Pressure treated red pine leaches at a higher level than do the lodgepole, Douglas fir, and the red pine ( Cooper, P. A., 1990).

No leaching study has addressed the issue of whether the metals leach as copper, or copper arsenate, or chromium arsenate or as complexes with inorganic or organic ligands or as derivative of wood metal moieties or as water soluble wood extracts. If the metals get complexed with organic ligands and become more mobile in soils and these then will not be adsorbed to humic substances.

Mobility in water for these metal ions from the CCA depend on many factors which may give rise to a number of pathways: these metals can first diffuse through the soils as complexes, simple salts, or free ions, or percolate through the soils as insoluble substances and are then carried to the water systems. Porous soils help the wood preservative components to move through into water and this increases the mobility of the metals in water. As insoluble and having been deposited on the sediments, these metals can be of environmental concern ( bioaccumulation) for the benthic organisms. 11 Migration into soils:

In an earlier work ( DeGroot, et al., 1979) on CCA A, CCA B and ACA treated southern pine wood stakes which were installed thirty years prior to the leaching study in acidic porch fine sandy soil in southern Mississippi, it was shown that the amount of leaching and mobility of the metal ions in the acidic soil is not significant. Background levels of As, Cr and Cu in this soil core depths were measured and are shown below:

Depth As* Cr* Cu* 0 6 in. 1.3 3.8 4.0 6 12 in. 0.6 7.5 4.2 12 18 in. 1.0 6.9 6.6 * All values were reported in ppm and at 95% confidence interval The preservation retention level for CCA A was 0.70 pcf ( 10.6 kg/ m3 ) and for CCA B it was 0.55 pcf ( 8.8 kg/ m3 ).

Table 1 summarizes the amounts of the metal ions that have leached into the soil from these stakes over a period of thirty years. The data includes the vertical transfer ( downward migration from the stake) and vertical or lateral migration from the base of the stake of the metal ions.

TABLE 1 Levels4 of As, Cr and Cu in soil core after vertical ( downward) and lateral transfer from the stakes Soil core location2 As CCA I1 As CCA II1 Cr CCA I Cr CCA II Cu CCA I Cu CCA II ( beneath) 0 6 18.93 108.1 25.1 22.9 56.6 48.3 6 12 1.6 21.4 8.2 7.4 6.9 8.2 12 18 1.2 1.1 9.2 6.2 5.7 6.4 ( lateral transfer) 0 0 73.2 183.2 45.9 24.2 75.8 47.9 0 3 5.6 117.7 9.4 8.2 11.8 15.3 Levels4 of As, Cr and Cu in soil core after vertical ( downward) and lateral transfer from the stakes 12 6 1.3 7.0 4.7 6.4 5.6 4.9 9 1.5 4.9 6.2 5.3 12.3 7.2 Notes: 1. CCA A and CCA B in the present terminology 2. Distance reported in inches 3. All values in ppm 4. At 95% confidence interval.

The above data indicated that in acidic soil the leaching and migration of metal ions was not very high either beneath ( downward migration) the soil or by lateral transfer ( ground level migration) of the metal ions from the stakes.

In a Nigerian study, on soil and vegetable contamination in and around a CCA wood treatment factory, very high levels of the metal ions were detected and these levels progressively decline significantly as one moves away from the treatment and storage sites. High levels of the metal ions were also detected in the vegetables and crops grown within the premises of the factory. The concentrations of the metal ions were measured in the top 4 cm of soil at and around the treatment/ storage facility. Table 2 summarizes the concentrations of the metal ions at various location in and outside the factory. The study did not provide the information of the type of soil at the factory premises and also which type of CCA ( A, B or C type) was used by the wood treatment factory.

Table 2 Measured metal ion concentrations in top 4 cm soil in a wood treatment factory & background level concentrations ( in µ g/ g, dry weight)

Sampling Site As( conc. range) As ( mean) Cr( conc. range) Cr( mean) Cu( conc. range) Cu( mean)

1 3456 7148 5312 2154 5810 3996 3817 7216 5424 2 956 4678 2552 868 3740 2046 1618 5478 3460 3 1092 3508 2211 788 3158 2005 2031 5180 3710 4 238 921 597 197 764 498 407 1062 763 5 8.4 21 16.1 38 78.6 59.3 67.4 103 82.9 6 0.1 40 6 5 1500 70 2 250 30 13 Notes: Sampling site # 1: soil samples from the preparation and mixing sites in the factory. Sampling site # 2: soil samples from the areas in the factory where freshly treated wooden poles are stacked. Sampling site# 3: soil samples from the areas where sludge is deposited inside the factory. Sampling site# 4: soil samples from 12 randomly selected sites inside the factory. Sampling site 5: soil samples from 1 km distance from the factory site. Sampling site 6: Background concentrations as reported in literature. ( Bowen, H. C., 1979)

In a recent study, 85 samples of contaminated soil were obtained from under and around seven decks which were CCA pressure treated and the ages of these decks were from 4 years to 15 years. These soil samples were composites of the upper 5 cm soil layers and the soil type was sandy loam. The extraction of the metal ion from the soil samples was carried out by digesting into conc. nitric acid under a pressure of 120 psi in a microwave oven and then diluted with deionized water. The concentration of the metal ions were determined by using ICP AES ( inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry). In addition, arsenic also determined with graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometer ( GFAAS). The average amounts ( in mg/ kg) were: 75 for Cu, 43 for Cr and 76 for As. These amounts indicate the leaching of the CCA components into the soil is high. This study also showed that the amounts of the metal ions increased in the soil with the age of a deck.

The same study also indicated that soil samples taken 15 cm from the deck perimeter showed the average amounts ( mg/ kg) of the metals to be: 67 for Cu, 46 for Cr and 32 for As which indicates that the soil contamination decreases a short distance away from the deck perimeter. 14 Table 3 summarizes the average amounts of these metal ions along with the amounts from control samples as well as EPA's statutory limits on these metal ions.

Table 3 Average amounts of metal ions ( mg/ kg) in the soil samples beneath decks and statutory limits Location/ Statutory Limits Chromium ( total) Chromium( VI) Arsenic Beneath decks 43 nd 76 Control soils 20 nd 4 EPA 503( 1993) 1200  41 State of CT ( 1996) 3900 100 10 This study, did not point out which type of wood was used for the decks ( southern pine or red pine etc.) and which type of CCA was used for pressure treatment of the lumber ( Stilwell, D. E. and K. D. Gorny, 1997).

Biotic Transformations & Bioaccumulations:

An earlier study ( Chou, et al., 1973) showed that between 3 4% of the metal ions were taken up by the Poria Monicola Fungal Hyphae on the pressure treated southern pine veneers with CCA which contained potassium dichromate, copper sulfate pentahydrate and arsenic pentoxide dihydrate in the ratio of 9: 7: 4.

Another comprehensive study ( Irvine and Dahlgren 1976), the growth of number of marine and non marine fungi and bacteria were affected when exposed to copper  chromearsenate put in an agar media. Table 4 summarizes the Minimum Inhibition Concentration ( MIC) of the CCA components needed to affect the growth of the these organisms. 15 Table 4 Minimum Inhibition Concentration Values for Marine & Non Marine Fungi Type of Fungi CuSO 4 ( mg/ L) Na 2 Cr 2 O 7 ( mg/ L) As 2 O 5 ( mg/ L) CCA %

Marine:

Corollospora cristata 137 482 244 0.2 Lulworthia sp. 274 482 488 0.1 Ceriosporopsis halima 546 1,928 976 0.2 Asteromyces cruciatus 546 2410 > 1220 0.4 Cladosporium herbarum > 1,370 482 > 1,220 0.2 Dendryphiella salina 1,096 964 1,220 0.4 Monodictys pelagica 274 482 244 0.1 Diplodia oraemaris 274 964 122 0.1 Zalerion maritimum 137 241 122 0.05 Cirrenalia macrocephala 68.5 482 244 0.05 Non Marine:

Chaetomium globosum ( P117) 546 241 488 0.05 Chaetomium globosum( R24) 274 482 244 0.025 Leptosphaeria sp. 546 120.5 488 0.025 Melogramma sp. 1,096 241 61 0.0125 Botryosporium sp. 1,370 120.5 244 0.4 Phoma sp. 546 964 976 0.1 Fusarium sp. 546 482 976 0.025 Doratomyces sp. 137 120.5 488 0.025 Stachybotrys atra 274 120.5 488 0.025 Graphium sp. 274 60.3 244 0.0125 Note: * means that growth of the fungi were stimulated at low concentrations. 16 For most of the microorganisms the M. I. C. values for chromium ranges from 120.5 to 964 mg/ L except for Ceriosporopsis halima ( 1928 mg/ L) and Asteromyces cruciatus ( 2410 mg/ L). In case of arsenic tolerance, most of the organisms had M. I. C. values between 244 to 976 mg/ L except for Asteromyces cruciatus ( 1220 mg/ L), Cladosporium herbarum ( 1220 mg/ L) and Dendryphiella salina ( 1220 mg/ L). The majority of the organisms showed M. I. C. values between 274 to 546 mg/ L vis a vis copper except for Melogramma sp. ( 1370 mg/ L) and Dendryphiella salina ( 1370 mg/ L). The range of tolerance for arsenic and chromium by these microorganisms were more than for copper.

It has been shown that in an estuary there are different pathways by which the CCA components leaching from the treated wood can impact the aquatic biota.. CCA components can dissolve in water forming aquated cations. These species can then be taken up by biota. Epibiotic organisms. Fouling organisms that live directly on the wood have the highest uptake of the contaminants. These metallic contaminants can be absorbed by sediments near the wood ( e. g. docks). These can then are taken up by the benthic organisms. These could be biomagnified through the food chain. The uptake ( bioaccumulation) of these metallic contaminants depend on the concentration of the metallic species which in turn depend on the amount of water flow in an estuary, amount and age of the CCA treated wood. Green algae Ulla lactuca and Enteromorpha intestinalis, collected from the CCA treated bulkheads in Southhampton, NY showed a higher degree of bioaccumulation for all three metal ions whereas the species collected from the nearby rocks showed a lower degree of bioaccumulation. Enteromorpha, for example, collected from the dock showed a bioaccumulation of 55 µ g/ g Cu, 6 µ g/ g of Cr and 4.7 µ g/ g of As; however, the same microogranism collected from the nearby rocks showed a bioaccumulation level of 14 µ g/ g for Cu, 2.5 µ g/ g of Cr and 1 µ g/ g of As. ( Weis and Weis, 1992a).

In another study, ( Weis, et al., 1993a) it was shown that if the organisms are tested for bioacuumulation in a body water where the water flow rates are different, the contaminants are bioaacuumulated at different levels. For example, algae Cermium sp., oysters Crassostrea virginica, barnacles balanus eburneus, and mussles Brachydontis recurvis were collected from a CCA treated dock in an open water environment and from bulkheads in a poorly flushes residential canal adjoining Santa Rosa Sound, Pensicola Beach, Florida as well as from the nearby rocks in open water. Open water docks organisms had a significantly higher level of bioaccumulation. For example Ceramium, living in open water area, showed a copper concentration of 3 µ g/ g , an increase of 2 µ g/ g from non exposed organisms, arsenic showed an increase from 3 µ g/ g ( non exposed organism) to 5.5 µ g/ g. The same study showed that organisms ( e. g. barnacles) that grew on rocks nearby the dock, had a 1 µ g/ g of copper bioaccumulation, those on the open water dock had 3 µ g/ g of copper, those in the canal ( poorly flushed areas) has about 10 µ g/ g of Cu and those that grew on the new wood docks ( 1 year old) inside the canal had a bioaccumulation of 80 µ g/ g Cu. In a related study ( Weis, et al., 1993 b), it was shown that the tissues of oysters living inside a canal showed the concentration of Cu to be 150 µ g/ g, an increase of 12 fold over the controls. The same oysters did not show an increased bioaccumulation for the other two metals. Other studies have also shown the same trend, oysters have a tendency of bioacumulating copper more than other metals ( Schuster & Pringle, 1969). 17 A study on the sediments adjacent to and close by distances to CCA treated bulkheads, on analyses showed a higher level of the three metal ions. Sediments adjacent to bullheads in New York and New Jersey estuaries consist of fine grained particles ( silt and clay often less than one percent). These sediments in these locations showed a very high concentration of the metals between 100 2000 µ g/ g. Sediments which were ten meters away from the bulkheads, consisted of higher percentages of silt and clay ( up to 60%) showed a lower concentrations of the metals. Sediments in poorly flushed areas showed a higher concentrations of the metals then the ones which are open water areas with regular water flows. Again the sediments around the newly built bulkheads showed the highest concentrations of the metals.

These sediments can possibly become a pathway of exposure to the benthic biota as shown in another study. Fiddler crabs U. Pugilator showed that the metal concentrations were double in the organisms than on the sediments ( Weis and Weis, 1992 a).

In 1979, The Agency published a document Water Related Environmental Fate of 129 Priority Pollutants ( EPA 440/ 4 79 029a) which summarized the open literature searches the fate of these Priority Pollutants in aqueous medium. The fate and transport of arsenic, chromium and copper are discussed in the following paragraphs:

Arsenic:

Table 5 summarizes the bioconcentration factors for arsenic in various taxa:

Table 5 Taxon Bioconc. Factor Reference Freshwater Plants 333 Chapman, et al., 1968 6000 Reay, 1973 FreshWater fish 333 Chapman, et al., 1968 Marine Plants 333 Chapman, et al., 1968 Marine Invertebrates 333 Chapman, et al., 1968 Marine Fish 333 Chapman, et al., 1968 Note that the bioconcentration factors were reported as the ratio of the concentration of the element in the aquatic organism ( in ppm, dry weight) to the concentration of the element in water ( in ppm).

The data from the table indicate that arsenic does show a tendency to accumulate through water and biomagnification ( food). The bioconcentration factors are not large, however, The EPA document also reported other bioaccumulation studies: 18 A. Isensee et al. ( 1973) conducted a microcosm study on the bioaccumulation of cacodylic acid derived arsenical and dimethyl arsine for 32 days. This simulated ecosystem contained algae, snails, daphnia and fish. Fish had minimum bioaccumulation in this selected group. Snails were next in line in bioaccumulating arsenic while the algae and daphnia showed the highest tendency to bioaccumulate arsenic. At the end of the study period ( 32 days), only 30% of arsenic was incorporated by the biota.

B. Green sunfish Lepomis cyanellus was exposed to various concentrations of sodium arsenate and the data indicated that the bioaccumulation of arsenic ( presumbaly as As+ 5) was a function of the sodium arsenate concentrations. The uptake of arsenic by liver, gut and muscle was also found to depend on the temperature.

C. A sixteen week exposure with sodium arsenate to young and adult bluegills Leomis marchochirus showed that the concentration of arsenic in the adult bluegill was the same as in the pond but the arsenic levels in the young bluegills were twice as high as in the adults.

D. A fish in a pond which was accidently contaminated with arsenical was analyzed and arsenic level was 2.5 mg As/ L; fish accumulated 6.6 µ g As/ g in muscle, one fifth of what is in water. Lake Michigan plankton and benthos showed a concentration factor of 6.0 and 6.6 µ g/ As / g respectively. Analysis of biota in Lake Superior showed the plankton contained 30% less As than the Lake Michcigan Plankton.

The same EPA document reported bioaccumulation and bioconcentration information about chromium which is summarized in the following: 19 Chromium:

Table 6 Bioconcentration Factors for Chromium Taxon Bioconcentration Factor Reference Freshwater fish 200 Chapman et al., 1968 Freshwater invertebrates 2,000 Chapman et al., 1968 Fresh water plants 4,000 Chapman et al., 1968 Marine fish 400 Chapman et al., 1968 Marine invertebrates 200 Chapaman et al., 1968 Marine plants 2,000 Chapman et al., 1968 Benthic algae 1,600 NAS*, 1974 Phytoplankton 2,300 NAS, 1974 Zooplankton 1,900 NAS, 1974 Mollusc viscera 440 NAS, 1974 Crustacean muscle 100 NAS, 1974 Fish muscle 70 NAS, 1974 NAS * means National Academy of Sciences.

An early study determined the chromium partitioning between water, sediment and chironomid larvae ( a benthic invertebrate). Highest concentration of chromium was found in the sediment ( 7.64 µ g/ g), followed by bioaccumulation of 2.96 µ g/ g of Cr in the chironomid and 1.1 µ g/ l in water ( Namminga and Wilhm, 1977). Another study showed a biomagnification of chromium when benthic worm ( tubificid) when fed with chromium rich bacteria bioaccumulated ( extracted) the metal from the bacteria ( Patrick and Loutit, 1976). Radiolabed Cr( III) was found to biomagnify through the food chain in an estuarine. The food chain consisted of phytoplankton, brine shrimp, post larval fish and mummichog. The concentration of the radiolabeled chromium declined in the food chain through trophic levels ( Baptist and Lewis, 1969). 20 Another study was conducted on the bioaccumulation of metals on the benthic ( sediments and microorganisms) impacted by the CCA treated wood bullheads in a large Atlantic Coast Estuaries. Accumulation of metals around the bulkheads and bioaccumulation in microorganisms were investigated at distance zero to 1, 3 and 10 meters from the bulkheads. Five sites, with different bulkhead ages, were chosen:

A. Middle Pond in Southhampton, New York. The bulkhead was one year old. Additionally, two reference sites, one an unbulkheaded site in the same pond and the second a bulkhead made up of aluminum in the nearby estuary at Bullhead bay in Southampton, N. Y.

B. Old Fort Pond, also in Southampton. This was an eight year old bulkhead in a poorly flushed location. A transect from the opposite shoreline was chosen as a reference.

C. Bulkheads along the Debardaue Canal, at the North Inlet Research Reserve in South Carolina. These were 2 year old bulkheads with intertidal situation and the Canal itself was very well flushed. An aluminum bulkhead in the same vicinity was chosen as a reference site.

D. A two year old bulkhead in Osborn Cove off the Patuexent River in the Chesapeake Bay, Maryland. This was a poorly flushed location and the natural shoreline was used as a reference site, 30 m across the cove.

E. A pair of adjacent bullheads at the Drum Point in Solomon, Maryland. One bulkhead was a CCA treated ( approximately 6 8 year old) and the second was made up of concrete.

Generally, the impact of CCA treated wood in an estuary depended on the surface area exposed to leaching, the leaching rate itself, metal speciation ( type of metal species present under the conditions), rate of uptake ( bioaccumulation) by epibiota,, tidal activity ( well or poorlyflushed locations, adsorption by sediment ( a function of particle size of the soil), trophic transfer to grazers and predators.

In the following the data summary is presented:

Middle Pond:

Sediments around the bulkhead were variable and made up of coarse and fine mixture. Fine sediment fraction was more at 10 meter from the bulkhead and find fractions generally retained the metals more tightly than the coarse fraction of the sediment. However, the percent of the contaminants ( the metals from the leaching from the wood) was highest at distance 0 meter from the bulkhead. The concentration ( bioaccumulation) was highest in the microrgansims at distance 0 meter from the bulkhead and progressively decreased to 1 to 3 to 10 meters away form the bulkhead. Comparatively, the metal contamination ( bioaccumulation) of mcirorganisms at the reference site was much lower than at the experimental site. The organisms present at the experimental and references sites were: Marenzelleria virdis, Leitoscoloplos sp., Neanthes spp., Clymenella torquada, a Capetillid and the snail Ilyanassa obseleta. Of these Neanthes was the most 21 predominant organism.

Old Fort Pond:

Chromium levels in the fine fractions of the sediment remained the same irrespective of the distance from the bulkhead, while the copper concentration was twice as high at zero distance from the bulkhead than at a distance away from it. Arsenic levels progressively declined moving away from the bulkhead. The change in the percent of total carbon in the sediment did not show any change in the accumulation numbers.

The dominant organisms at this site ( both actual and reference) were: Marenzelleria virdis, Leitoscoloplos sp., Neanthes spp., Clymenella torquada, a Capitellid and Hypaniola gray as well as clams Melaena lateralis, the bubble snail Haminoea and Cyathura polita. The data analysis for the bioaccumulation in these species was difficult as it did not show any trend in the concentration levels of metals at various distances from the bulkhead.

North Inlet, Debardeau Canal:

The highest concentrations of the metals was at the site at zero meter distance from the bulkhead. Since this site consisted of the wood bulkhead and the reference site was aluminum, the analysis showed that there were no organsims at the wood bulkhead at distance of zero and one meter from the wood bulkhead while at 3 meter distance Notomastus was the main organism and other organisms were also present like Neanthes, a nemertean Lineus socialis At the Al bulkhead also the dominant organism was Notomastus and besides there were Clymenella, Lineus, Neanthes, Melaena lateralis and Mercenaria.

Osborne Cove:

The copper accumulations did not vary much from zero meter distance to the maximum ( 10 meters). However, arsenic did show some variations with distance.

The type of organisms existing at the zero meter actual site were: Lanonereis culveri, Hargeria rapax, Marenzerellia virdis, and Hobsonia florida. Reference sight consisted of, in addition to the ones mentioned, the follwoing: Hypereteone heteropoda, Leitoscoloplos fragilis, Streblospio benedecti, Macoma balthica, M. Mitchelli, Lepidodactylus dyticus, Balanus improvsus and Cyathura polita.

Drum Point Both copper and chromium showed a declining accumulation moving away from the bulkhead.

The organisms present on this site were predominantly: Leitoscoloplos fragilis, marenzelleria virdus, Leptocheirus plumulosus, Gemma gemmma. No significant difference bioacummulation differences were observed at various locations on this site. 22 In summary, bioaccumulation in Middle Pond organisms were highest in the organism living closest to the wooden bulkheads. Bioaccumulation in tissues declined dramatically at a 3 meter distance from the bulkhead. In some cases, it rose again by 10 meters but primarily due to the increase in the fine sediment fraction which has a tendency to adsorb and retain the metals.

It appears at all bulkhead sites metals are retained ( accumulated) by fine grained sediments and a reduction ensues in the nearby biota. Unbulkheaded and aluminum bulkheads do not show this tendency. The biota at 10 meter out from the bulkhead at Middle Pond showed reduction because of percent increase of fine grained sediments while for Old Fort Pond the same phenomenon was observed at 3 and 10 meters away from the bulkheads because of the same reason. At all sites, the impact on biota was highest between zero and 1 meter distance from the bulkheads. And in all cases, copper was observed to be responsible for the reduction in the biota around the bulkheads ( Weis et al., 1998)

A recent study on bioaccumulation of CCA components in Blue Mussels Mytilus Edulis was conducted and the laboratory and field expsoure data were collected over a period of one year. The CCA treated wood was of the Southern Yellow Pine type. CCA C treated wood boards ( 4.4 cm x 22.8 cm x 3 m) were pressure treated at a treatment retention of 2.5 pcf ( 40 kg/ m3. ). Two sets of blue mussels, one 4 5 cm long and the other 3.5 to 4 cm long were collected from the east jetty at the Flax Pond inlet, Old field, New York. the laboratory sea tables were arrnged in such a way that one set of blue mussles were upstream to water flow and the other downstream to water flow. The mussles were sampled form each sea table at time 0, one week and one month. Similar arrangements, samples of blue mussles, submerges in water and were placed adjacent to the wood. After the experiment was terminated, freeze dried mussles were digested in nitric/ perchloric acid mixture and samples collected were anlayzed for copper, chromium and arsenic by flame ( Cu) and graphite furnace ( Cr and As) atomic absorption spectrophotometry. The laboratory and field exposure studies showed that no significant difference in the average dry tissue weight and length between CCA C treated and control treatments.

Table 8 summarizes the concentrations of Cu, Cr and As in the tissues of blue mussel. Concentration of these metals obtained by Mussel Watch, organized by national Status & Trends sampling stations in Long Island Sound are also included in the table for comparison purposes.

TABLE 8 1 Contaminant Lab. Exposure Field Exposure Mussel Watch2 Cu 7.88 8.54 8.91 Cr 0.86 0.72 1.61 As 8.82 7.14 6.24 Notes: 1. All values in µ g/ g 23 2. Data from 1990 reports Note that the measured metal contents of mussel tissues in both laboratory and field exposure studies are at or lower than the average values obtained from the national or regional monitoring studies. The species of these elements affect their bioaccumulation in mussel tissues. 24 REFERENCES Anderson, A. G. 1990. The Accelerated Fixation of Chromated Copper Preservative Treated Wood. American Wood Preservers' Association: 129 151 Aceto, M., Fedele, A. 1994. Rain Water Effect on the Release of Arsenic, Chromium and Copper From Treated Wood. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin: 3: 389 394 Arsenault, R. D. 1975. CCA Treated Wood Foundations: A Study of Permanence, Effectiveness, Durability, and Environmental Considerations. American Wood Preservers' Association: 126 149 Baes, C. F. and R. E. Mesmer. 1976. The Hydrolysis of Cations, John Wiley & Sons, New York.

Baptist, J. P. and Lewis, C. W. 1969. Transfer of 65Zn and 51Cr through an Estuarine Food Chain. Proceedings of Second National Symposium on Radioecology. U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Conference. 670503: 420 430 Barnhart, J. 1997. Occurances, Uses and Properties of Chromium. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 26: S3 S7 Breslin, V. T., and Adler Ivanbrook, L. 1998. Release of Copper, Chromium and Arsenic From CCA C Treated Lumber in Estuaries. Estuaries, Coastal and Shelf Science. 46( 1): 111 125 Bowen, H. C. 1979 Environmental Chemistry of Elements. Academic Press, N. Y: 60ff Burgess, J. 1978. Metal Ions In Solution. Ellis Harwood: 11

Chapman, W. H., Fisher, H. L., and Prett, M. W. 1968. Concentration Factors of Chemical Elements in Edible Aquatic Organisms. Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, Livermore, California. UCRL 50564: 46ff.

Chen Abraham Shou chien and C. S. Walters, 1979. The Fate of Arsenic in Pressure Treated Southern Pine Plywood Subjected to Heavy Artificial Rainfall. American Wood Preservers' Association: 188 232.

Chou, C. K., Chandler, J. A., Preston, R. D., 1973. Uptake of Metal Toxicants by Fungal Hyphae Colonizing CCA Impregnated Wood. Wood Science and Technology. 7: 206 211 Cooper, P. A. and MacVicar, R. 1995. Effects of Water Repellent on Leaching From CCA Treated Wood. The Twenty sixth Annual Meeting of the International Research Group on Wood Preservation. Document No. IRG/ WP 95 50044.

Cooper, P. A. 1991 Leaching of CCA from Treated Wood: pH Effects. Forest Products Journal. 41( 1): 30 32 25 Cooper, P. A., and Ung, Y. T. 1992a Accelerated Fixation of CCA Treated Poles. Forest Products Journal. 42( 9): 27 32 Cooper, P. A., and Ung, Y. T. 1992b. Leaching of CCA C From Jackpine Sapwood in Compost. Forest Products Journal. 42( 9): 57 59 Dahlgren, S. E. and Hartford, W. H. 1972. Kinetics and Mechansims of Fixation of Cu Cr As Wood Preservatives. Part I: pH Behavior and General Aspects of Fixation. Part II: Fixation of Boliden 333. Part III: Fixation of Tanalith C and Comparison of Different Preservatives. Holzforschung. 26: 62 69, 105 113, and 142 149.

Dahlgren, S. E. 1974a. Kinetics and Mechansims of Fixation of Cu Cr As Wood Preservatives. Part IV. Holzforschung. 28 : 58 61.

Dahlgren, S. E., 1975b. Kinetics and Mechanisms of fixation of Cu Cr As Wood Preservatives. Part V. Holzforschung. 29: 84 95.

DeGroot, R. C., Popham, T. W., Gjovik, L. R., and Forehand, T. 1979. Distribution Gradients of Arsenic, Copper, and Chromium Around Preservative Treated Wooden Stakes. Journal of Environmental Quality. 8( 1): 39 41.

Emsley, J. 1989 The Elements. Oxford Press, NY.

EPA 1979. Water Related Environmental Fate of 129 Priority Pollutants, EPA 440/ 4 79 029a.

EPA, 1984. Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Copper; USEPA ORD, Office of Water, EPA 440 IS 84 031.

Fromm, P. O., and Stokes, R. M. 1962. Assimilation and Metabolism of Chromium by Trout. Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation. 34( 1): 1151 1155 Hawley's Condensed Chemical Dictionary. 1997. Editor: Lewis, R. J., Sr. John Wiley Publishers, NY., Thirteenth Edition.

Hstrick, J. A. and J. Jones. 1991. Memo Re: Estimated Environmental Concentrations for Cu III ions, Nov. 7, 1991. An internal EFED document.

Hetrick, J. A. 1993. Phase IV Package For Metallic Copper, Inorganic Cu( II) Salts and Oxides, Inorganic Cu( I) Salts and Oxides, and Organic Copper complexes; Assessment of New uses, Data Requirements for Cu( I & II) Oxides and Hydroxides; And Assessment of Leaching Rate Study Protocols for Metallic Copper. US EPA, Office of Pesticides Programs/ Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Internal Document.

Hetrick, J. A. 1994. Copper Sulfate, Copper Compounds, Copper Salts, Copper Oxides RED US EPA, Office of Pesticides Programs/ Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Internal Document. 26 Holm, T. R. 1979. Chemical Modeling in Aqueous systems, E. A. Jenne, Editor, American Chemical Society Symposium Series 93, Washington, DC, pp 711.

Irvine, J. and Dahlgren, S. E. 1976. Kinetics and Mechanisms of Fixation of Cu Cr As Wood preservatives. Part VI. Holzforschung. 30: 30 44.

Isenee, A. R., Kearney, P. C., Woolson, E. A., Jones, G. E. and Williams, V. P. 1973. Distribution of Alkyl Arsenicals in Model Ecosystems. Environmental Science and Technology 7( 9): 841 845.

Adler Ivanbrook, L, and Breslin, V. 1999. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 18( 2): 213 221 Kaldas, M. and Cooper, P. A. 1996. Forest Product Journal. 46( 10): 67 70 Khobot'ev, V. G., Kapov, V. I., Rikhadze, E. G., Turanina, N. V. and Shidlovskaga, N. A. 1976 Copper Uptake by Algae From Copper Containing Compounds and the Effect of this Process on their Salt metabolism. Gidiobiol. Zh. 12( 1): 40 46 ( Russian). Chemical Abstracts 1976 85: 42023r.

Lebow, S. 1996. USDA Forest Product Lab, General Technical Report., FLP GTR 93.

Lebow, S. T., Morrell, J. J., and Milota, M. R. 1996. Western Wood Species Treated With Chromated Copper Arsenate: Effect of Moisture Content. Forest Journal. 46( 2): 67 70.

Lee, A. W. C., Grafton, J. C. and Tainter, F. H. 1993. Effect of Rapid Redrying Shortly After Treatment on Leachability of CCA Treated Southern Pine. In: Chromium Containing Waterborne Wood Preservatives: Fixation and Environmental Issues. Madison, Wisconsin. Editors: Winandy, J and Barnes, M. Forest Products Society: 52 55.

Lindsay, W. L. 1979. Chemical Equilbria in Soils. John Wiley & Sons, NY. pp. 282 298.

Long, D. T., E. E. Angino, 1977. Geochim. Cosmochim Acta, volume 41. pp 1183 91.

McNamara, W. S. 1989. CCA Fixation Experiments Parts 1 and 2. The Twentieth Annual Meeting Congress Center, Lappeenranta, Finland. Document No: IRG/ WP/ 3505.

Merkle, P., Gallagher, D. L., and Solberg, T. N. 1993. Leaching Rates of Metals Distribution and Chemistry of CCA Treated Lumber: Implications for Water Quality Modeling. In: proceedings, Forest Products Society Symposium on Environmental Considerations in the Use of Pressure Treated Wood, Richmond, VA.

Namminga, H. And Wilhm, J. 1977. Heavy Metals in Water, Sediments and Chironomids. Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation. 49( 7): 1725 1731 National Academy of Sciences. 1974 Chromium U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 27 D. C.: 86 89 Patrick, F. M. and Loutit, M. 1976. Passage of Metals in Effluents Through Bacteria to Higher Organisms. Water Research. 10: 333 335.

Pettine, M. and F. J. Millero. 1990. Limnology Oceanography, volume 35( 3), pp 730 736.

Wendt, P. H., Van Dolah, R. F., Bobo, M. Y., Matthews, T. D., and Levisen, M. V. 1996. Wood Preservative Leachates From Docks in an Estuarine Environment. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 31: 24 37 Phelps, D. K, Telek, G. and Lapan, R. L. 1975. Evalaution of the Distribution of Various Heavy Metals in the Food Chain. Ing. Ambinetale. 4( 3): 321 328( Italian) Chemical Abstracts 1976. 84: 131057f.

Raymont, J. E. G. 1972 Pollution in Southampton Water. Proceedings of Royal Society Series B. 180( 106): 451 468. ( Chemical Abstract 1973) 78: 144603f.

Reay, P. F. 1973. The Accumulation of Arsenic From Arsenic Rich natural Waters by Aquatic Plants J. Applied Ecology 9( 2): 557 565 Sanders, R. J. 1982. The effect of ph upon Cu and Cupric ion concentration in soil solution. J. Soil Science, Vol. 33, pp. 679 689.

Sandhu, S. S. 1977. Study on Post Mortem Identification of Pollutants in the Fish Killed by Water Pollution: Detection of Arsenic Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 17( 3): 373 378 Seydel, I. S. 1972 Distribution and Circulation of Arsenic Through Water, Organisms and Sediments of Lake Michigan. Archives of Hydrobiology 71( 1): 17 30 Shuster, C. N, and Pringle, B. H. 1969. Trace Metal Accumulation by the American Oyster, Crassostrea Virginicia. Proceedings of the National Shellfisheries Association: 59 91 Sorensen, E. M. B. 1976 Thermal Effects on the Accumulation of Arsenic in Green Sunfish, Lepomis Cyanellus. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology Stanley, J. S. 1994. Task III CCA C: Chromated Arsenical Treated Wood Aqueous Leaching Study. Midwest Research Institute. May 27, 1994. MRID 432492 01. Unpublished.

Stilwell, D. E. and Gorny, K. D. 1997. Contamination of Soil with Copper, Chromium and Arsenic Decks Built From Pressure Treated Wood. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 58: 22 29.

Wauchope, R. D. 1975. J. Environ. Qual. Volume 4, pp 499. 28 Warner, J. E. and Solomon, K. R. 1990. Acidity As a Factor In Leaching of Copper, Chromium and Arsenic From CCA Treated Wood. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 9: 1331 1337.

Weis, J. S., and Weis, P. 1992. Transfer of Contaminants From CCA Treated Lumber to Aquatic Biota. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 161: 189 199 Weis, P., Weis, J. S., and Emile Lores. 1993. Marine Pollution Bulletin. Uptake of metals From Chromated Copper Arsenate( CCA) Treated Lumber by Epibiota. 8: 428 430 Weis, J. S., Weis, P., and Proctor, T. 1998. The Extent of Benthic Impacts of CCA Treated Wood Structures in Atlantic coast Estuaries. 34: 313 322 Wilson, A. 1971. The Effects of Temperature, Solution, Strength and Timber Species on the Rate of Fixation of a Copper Chrome Arsenate Wood Preservative. Institute of Wood Science 5( 6): 36 40.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 191 (Monday, October 3, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68096-68098]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23790]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0003]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Hearing

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

ACTION: Notice of applications for exemption; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 26 individuals
for an exemption from the hearing requirement in the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) to operate commercial motor
vehicles (CMV) in interstate commerce. Granting these exemptions would
enable these hard of hearing and deaf individuals to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 2, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2016-0003 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 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: 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.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number(s) for this notice. Note that all comments received will
be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below
for further information.
    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 online.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov as described in
the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed
at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions
regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket
Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the FMCSRs 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
statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the
two-year period.
    The 26 individuals listed in this notice have requested an
exemption from the hearing requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11), which
applies to drivers who operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate the qualifications of each
applicant to determine whether granting the exemption will achieve the
required level of safety mandated by statute.
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding hearing
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person:

    First perceives a forced whispered voice in the better ear at
not less than 5 feet with or without the use of a hearing aid or, if
tested by use of an audiometric device, does not have an average
hearing loss in the better ear greater than 40 decibels at 500 Hz,
1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz with or without a hearing aid when the
audiometric device is calibrated to American National Standard
(formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5-1951.

    This standard was adopted in 1970 and was revised in 1971 to allow
drivers to be qualified under this standard while wearing a hearing
aid, 35 FR 6458, 6463 (April 22, 1970) and 36 FR 12857 (July 3, 1971).
    On February 1, 2013, FMCSA announced in a Notice of Final
Disposition titled, Qualification of Drivers; Application for
Exemptions; National Association of the Deaf, (78 FR 7479), its
decision to grant requests from 40 individuals for exemptions from the
Agency's physical qualification standard concerning hearing for
interstate CMV drivers. Subsequent to the publication February 1, 2013
of the notice, the Agency has published additional notices granting
requests from hard of hearing and deaf individuals for exemptions from
the Agency's physical qualification standard concerning hearing for
interstate CMV drivers.

II. Qualifications of Applicants

Kay Baden

    Ms. Baden, age 59, holds a class A CDL in Oregon.

Wyatt M. Baldwin

    Mr. Baldwin, age 31, holds an operator's license in Nevada.

Moises Becerra

    Mr. Becerra, age 26, holds an operator's license in Texas.

Matthew R. Burgoyne

    Mr. Burgoyne, age 29, holds a class A CDL in Minnesota.

Pedro H. Calas

    Mr. Calas, age 30, holds a class A CDL in Florida.

David T. Carlson

    Mr. Carlson, age 76, holds a class A CDL in Wisconsin.

Marco A. Cisneros

    Mr. Cisneros, age 26, holds an operator's license in California.

Mark B. Cole

    Mr. Cole, age 40, holds an operator's license in California.

Filipe S. Fernandez

    Mr. Fernandez, age 49 holds an operator's license in Florida.

Joshua Gelona

    Mr. Gelona, age 25, holds an operator's license in Oklahoma.

William D. Gum

    Mr. Gum, age 76, holds an operator's license in Texas.

Reginald C. Holmes

    Mr. Holmes, age 31, holds an operator's license in Arizona.

Gary D. McBride

    Mr. McBride, age 50, holds an operator's license in Florida.

Brent D. McCaffery

    Mr. McCaffery, age 29, holds an operator's license in Iowa.

Benjoel C. Morton

    Mr. Morton, age 35, holds an operator's license in Georgia.

Anthony S. Papa

    Mr. Papa, age 51, holds an operator's license in Ohio.

Eduardo Pedregal

    Mr. Pedregal, age 27, holds an operator's license in Texas.

Charles L. Pitt

    Mr. Pitt, age 52, holds an operator's license in Alabama.

David Y. Pro

    Mr. Pro, age 55, holds an operator's license in California.

Leonardo Pupo-Tuperet

    Mr. Pupo-Tuperet, age 26, holds an operator's license in
Washington.

Edgar J. Ramos

    Mr. Ramos, age 52, holds an operator's license in Illinois.

Ronald D. Rumsey

    Mr. Rumsey, age 53, holds an operator's license in Iowa.

Johnny Seng

    Mr. Seng, age 22, holds an operator's license in Rhode Island.

Michael J. Sladick

    Mr. Sladick, age 48, holds an operator's license in Ohio.

Brian J. Walthall

    Mr. Walthall, age 49, holds an operator's license in Kansas.

Jack Whitewater

    Mr. Whitewater, age 38, holds an operator's license in Florida.

III. Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA requests
public

comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions
described in this notice. We will consider all comments received before
the close of business on the closing date indicated in the dates
section of the notice.

IV. Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket number FMCSA-2016-0003 and click
the search button. When the new screen appears, click on the blue
``Comment Now!'' button on the right hand side of the page. On the new
page, enter information required including the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\
by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period. FMCSA may issue a final determination any time after
the close of the comment period.

V. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert
the docket number FMCSA-2016-0003 and click ``Search.'' Next, click
``Open Docket Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments
related to this notice.

    Issued on: September 21, 2016.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-23790 Filed 9-30-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 128 (Wednesday, July 3, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 31725]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14229]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2019-0311]

Safety Zones; Annual Fireworks Displays Within the Captain of the
Port, Puget Sound

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce four safety zones for annual
firework displays in the Captain of the Port, Puget Sound Zone during
the dates and times noted under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. This action
is necessary to prevent injury and to protect life and property of the
maritime public from the hazards associated with the firework displays.
During the enforcement periods, entry into, transit through, mooring,
or anchoring within these safety zones is prohibited unless authorized
by the Captain of the Port, Puget Sound or their Designated
Representative.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.1332 will be enforced for the four
safety zones identified in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below
5 p.m. on July 4, 2019, through 1 a.m. on July 5, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice of enforcement, call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade Ellie Wu,
Sector Puget Sound Waterways Management, Coast Guard; telephone 206-
217-6051<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce regulations in
in 33 CFR 165.1332 for the following four safety zones established for
Annual Fireworks Displays within the Captain of the Port, Puget Sound
Area of Responsibility. These regulations will be enforced from 5 p.m.
on July 4, 2019, through 1 a.m. on July 5, 2019, at the following
locations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Event name                               Location                 Latitude        Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tacoma Freedom Fair..........................  Commencement Bay...............   47[deg]17.103'  122[deg]28.410'
                                                                                N               W.
Friday Harbor Independence...................  Friday Harbor..................   48[deg]32.255'   123[deg]0.654'
                                                                                N               W.
Three Tree Point Community Fireworks.........  Three Tree Point...............   47[deg]27.033'   122[deg]23.15'
                                                                                N               W.
Seattle Seafair..............................  Lake Union.....................   47[deg]38.418'  122[deg]20.111'
                                                                                N               W.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The special requirements listed in 33 CFR 165.1332(b) apply to the
activation and enforcement of these safety zones. All vessel operators
who desire to enter the safety zone must obtain permission from the
Captain of the Port or their Designated Representative by contacting
the Coast Guard Sector Puget Sound Joint Harbor Operations Center
(JHOC) on VHF Ch 13 or Ch 16 or via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>. The
Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, State, or local law
enforcement agencies in enforcing this regulation.
    In addition to the publication of this document in the Federal
Register, the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with
extensive advanced notification of enforcement of these safety zones
via the Local Notice to Mariners.

    Dated: June 28, 2019.
L.A. Sturgis,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Puget Sound.
[FR Doc. 2019-14229 Filed 7-2-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P