FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 1 of 35 Mineral Mining and Processing ( 40 CFR 436) Detailed Investigation for 2004/ 2005 Planning Process Executive Summary During the Screening Level Review phase of the 2004/ 2005 planning process, mineral mining and processing was one of eight industrial categories identified solely through Factor 4 concerns. Issues driving the concerns include: 1) pollutants not covered by the guidelines ( specifically TSS), and 2) consistent application of the guideline by permit writers. Based on information reported to the Toxic Release Inventory ( TRI) and the Permit Compliance System ( PCS), toxic discharges from mineral mining facilities are low relative to other industrial categories. In addition, generally, a few facilities drive the toxic weighted pound equivalent ( TWPE) loading estimates from both TRI and PCS.

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, concerns identified for this industry could be addressed through improved information dissemination and outreach by EPA. This is especially true due to the concentration of existing mines in Region 4 and in Michigan. The Agency could prepare a fact sheet with answers to frequently asked questions ( FAQs), including the names of current contacts within the 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. 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 Concerns Identified in Comments to Proposal Followup Contacts Possible Solutions FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 2 of 35 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 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 0xxx). 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 Mineral Mining and Processing are presented in this report.

Industry and Related Subcategories The Mineral Mining point source category is regulated at 40 CFR Part 436. See Attachment C for the applicability and regulatory background. This point source category includes facilities reporting under two Standard Industrial Classification ( SIC) industry groups: 14   Mining and Quarrying of Non metallic Minerals, except fuels, and 32   Stone Clay, Glass, and Concrete Products. See Attachment C for the applicability and regulatory background. Specifically, it FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 3 of 35 includes SIC 1422 ( Crushed and broken limestone), 1442 ( Construction sand and gravel), 1459 ( Clay, ceramic, and refractory minerals not elsewhere classified), 1475 ( Phosphate rock), 1479 ( Chemical and fertilizer mineral mining not elsewhere classified), 1481 ( Non metallic minerals services, except fuels), and SIC 3295 ( Minerals and Earths, Ground or Otherwise Treated). All of these SICs are represented by dischargers reporting to the Permit Compliance System ( PCS) but not in Toxic Release Inventory ( TRI). It also includes SIC 3275 ( Gypsum Products) which was reported in PCS and was the only SIC represented in the TRI. No specific subcategories were identified during the Factor 4 analysis; however, two subcategories were discussed in comments to the proposal: Crushed Stone Subcategory B ( 40 CFR 436.20), and Construction Sand and Gravel Subcategory C ( 40 CFR 436.30), covered by SIC 1442.

° SIC 1411  Dimension Stone Establishments primarily engaged in mining or quarrying dimension stone. Also included are establishments engaged in producing rough blocks and slabs. Establishments primarily engaged in mining dimension soapstone or in mining or quarrying and shaping grindstones, pulpstones, millstones, burrstones, and sharpening stones are classified in Industry 1499. Establishments primarily engaged in dressing ( shaping, polishing, or otherwise finishing) blocks and slabs are classified in Manufacturing, Industry 3281. Nepheline syenite mining operations are classified in Industry 1459.

° SIC 1422  Crushed and Broken Limestone Establishments primarily engaged in mining or quarrying crushed and broken limestone, including related rocks, such as dolomite, cement rock, marl, travertine, and calcareous tufa. Also included are establishments primarily engaged in the grinding or pulverizing of limestone, but establishments primarily engaged in producing lime are classified in Manufacturing, Industry 3274.

° SIC 1423  Crushed and Broken Granite Establishments primarily engaged in mining or quarrying crushed and broken granite, including related rocks, such as gneiss, syenite, and diorite.

° SIC 1429  Crushed and Broken Stone, Not Elsewhere Classified Establishments primarily engaged in mining or quarrying crushed and broken stone, not elsewhere classified.

° SIC 1442  Construction Sand and Gravel Establishments primarily engaged in operating sand and gravel pits and dredges, and in washing, screening, or otherwise preparing sand and gravel for construction uses.

° SIC 1446  Industrial Sand Establishments primarily engaged in operating sand pits and dredges, and in washing, screening, and otherwise preparing sand for uses other than construction, such as glassmaking, molding, and abrasives.

° SIC 1455  Kaolin and Ball Clay Establishments primarily engaged in mining, milling, or FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 4 of 35 otherwise preparing kaolin or ball clay, including china clay, paper clay, and slip clay.

° SIC 1459  Clay, Ceramic, and Refractory Minerals, Not Elsewhere Classified Establishments primarily engaged in mining, milling, or otherwise preparing clay, ceramic, or refractory minerals, not elsewhere classified.

° SIC 1474  Potash, Soda, and Borate Minerals Establishments primarily engaged in mining, milling, or otherwise preparing natural potassium, sodium, or boron compounds. Establishments primarily engaged in mining common salt are classified in Industry 1479.

° SIC 1475  Phosphate Rock Establishments primarily engaged in mining, milling, drying, calcining, sintering, or otherwise preparing phosphate rock, including apatite. Establishments primarily engaged in the production of phosphoric acid, super phosphates, or other manufactured phosphate compounds or chemicals are classified in Manufacturing, Major Group 28.

° SIC 1479  Chemical and Fertilizer Mineral Mining, Not Elsewhere Classified Establishments primarily engaged in mining, milling, or otherwise preparing chemical or fertilizer mineral raw materials, not elsewhere classified. Establishments primarily engaged in milling, grinding, or otherwise preparing barite not in conjunction with mining or quarry operations are classified in Manufacturing, Industry 3295; similar establishments preparing other minerals of this industry are included here. Establishments primarily engaged in producing salt by evaporation of sea water or brine are classified in Manufacturing, Industry 2899.

° SIC 1481  Nonmetallic Minerals Services, Except Fuels Establishments primarily engaged in the removal of overburden, strip mining, and other services for nonmetallic minerals, except fuels, for others on a contract or fee basis. Establishments primarily engaged in performing hauling services are classified in Division E, Transportation and Public Utilities.

° SIC 1499  Miscellaneous Nonmetallic Minerals, Except Fuels Establishments primarily engaged in mining, quarrying, milling, or otherwise preparing nonmetallic minerals, except fuels. This industry includes the shaping of natural abrasive stones at the quarry. Establishments primarily engaged in the production of blast, grinding, or polishing sand are classified in Industry 1446, and those calcining gypsum are classified in Manufacturing, Industry 3275.

° SIC 3275  Gypsum Products Establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing plaster, plasterboard, and other products composed wholly or chiefly of gypsum, except articles of plaster of paris and papier mache.

° SIC 3295  Minerals and Earths, Ground or Otherwise Treated Establishments operating FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 5 of 35 without a mine or quarry and primarily engaged in crushing, grinding, pulverizing, or otherwise preparing clay, ceramic, and refractory minerals; barite; and miscellaneous nonmetallic minerals, except fuels. These minerals are the crude products mined by establishments of Industry Groups 145 and 149, and by those of Industry 1479 mining barite. Also included are establishments primarily crushing slag and preparing roofing granules. The beneficiation or preparation of other minerals and metallic ores, and the cleaning and grading of coal, are classified in Division B, Mining, whether or not the operation is associated 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 info reported to PCS and TRI and have used it as reported. Although 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.

Table 1. Number of Facilities SIC 1997 Economic Census PCS TRI Total Major Minor Total No reported discharge Direct discharge Indirect discharge Both direct and indirect 1411 178 8 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 1422 1435 173 6 167 0 0 0 0 0 1423 290 14 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 1429 459 39 0 39 0 1 0 0 0 1442 2367 139 4 135 1 1 0 0 0 1446 140 17 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 1455 35 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 1459 132 23 3 20 0 0 0 0 0 1474 27 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1475 20 22 18 4 0 0 0 0 0 1479 45 9 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 1481 172 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1499 216 34 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 3275 208 11 0 11 18 17 1 0 0 3295 388 31 0 31 50 44 3 1 2 SIC 1997 Economic Census PCS TRI Total Major Minor Total No reported discharge Direct discharge Indirect discharge Both direct and indirect FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 6 of 35 Source: PCSLoads2000, TRIReleases2000 aFacilities in SIC code 14, ( Mining and Quarrying of Nonmetallic Minerals Except Fuels) are not required to report to TRI. Facilities in SIC codes 3275 and 3295 that meet the employee requirements and chemical use thresholds are required to report.

Table 2. Mineral Mining Facilities Reporting to PCS, Sorted by State SIC NPDES ID NAME CITY STATE 1422 AL0003662 SYLACAUGA OPERATIONS IMERYS SYLACAUGA AL 1442 AZ0024384 SAN XAVIER ROCK & MATERIALS CORTARO AZ 1475 FL0000230 IMC AGRICO CO  NORALYN/ PHO. MULBERRY FL 1475 FL0001902 US AGRI CHEMICALS FT MEADE FORT MEADE FL 1475 FL0000353 IMC AGRICO CO  PAYNE CK MINE MULBERRY FL 1475 FL0037958 CARGILL FERT S FT MEADE MINE NICHOLS FL 1475 FL0000311 AGRIFOS L. L. C.  NICHOLS MINE NICHOLS FL 1475 FL0000256 IMC AGRICO CO  KINGSFORD MULBERRY FL 1475 FL0033294 CARGILL FERT. HOOKERS PRARIE BARTOW FL 1475 FL0000671 CARGILL FERTILIZER INC. MULBERRY FL 1475 FL0032590 IMC AGRICO CO  HOPEWELL MULBERRY FL 1475 FL0000264 IMC AGRICO CO  PORT SUTTON MULBERRY FL 1475 FL0033332 IMC AGRICO CO  LONESOME MULBERRY FL 1475 FL0027600 IMC AGRICO CO  FT GREEN MINE MULBERRY FL 1475 FL0001198 CARGILL FERT. FT. MEADE MINE FT MEADE FL 1475 FL0038652 FARMLAND HYDRO L. P. TAMPA FL 1475 FL0032522 NU GULF INDUSTRIES INC MYAKKA CITY FL 1475 FL0035271 C F INDUSTRIES  HARDEE WAUCHULA FL 1475 FL0036412 IMC AGRICO CO  FOUR CORNERS MULBERRY FL 1475 FL0040177 CF INDUSTRIES  HARDEE COMPLEX WAUCHULA FL 1479 FL0000655 PCS PHOSPHATE WHITE SPRINGS WHITE SPRINGS FL 1479 FL0036226 PCS PHOSPAHTE WHITE SPRINGS WHITE SPRINGS FL 1479 LA0068250 FREEPORT SULP CO CAMINADA MINE GULF OF MEXICO LA 1422 MI0026514 STONECO INC OTTAWA LAKE OTTAWA LAKE MI 1422 MI0045802 ROCKWOOD QUARRY LLC NEWPORT MI 1422 MI0003468 LAFARGE N AMERICA STONEPORT PRESQUE ISLE MI 1422 MI0004111 MICH LIMESTONE ROGERS CITY ROGERS CITY MI 1442 MI0001368 US SILICA CO ROCKWOOD MI 1442 MI0044491 SYLVANIA MINERALS SOUTH ROCKWOOD MI 1422 MI0051195 THOMPSON MCCULLY QUARRY CO NEWPORT MI 1481 MO0002003 DOE RUN BUICK MINE VIBURNUM MO 1459 NC0000353 FELDSPAR CORP. / SPRUCE PINE SPRUCE PINE NC 1459 NC0000400 K T FELDSPAR CORPORATION SPRUCE PINE NC SIC NPDES ID NAME CITY STATE FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 7 of 35 1459 NC0000175 UNIMIN CORPORATION / QUARTZ SPRUCE PINE NC 1442 NY0006173 STONE WASH PLANT PLEASANT VALLEY NY Table 3. Mineral Mining Facilities Reporting to TRI, Sorted by State SIC Facility TRI ID Facility Name City State 3295 72216M POBOX 3M LITTLE ROCK AR 3295 31404KTLST1800E ENGELHARD CORP. SAVANNAH OPS. SAVANNAH GA 3295 14305TMCRM4511H FERRO ELECTRONIC MATERIALS NIAGARA FALLS NY 3275 43433NTDSTGYPSU UNITED STATES GYPSUM CO. GYPSUM OH 3295 29510MTCHMROSEM TREBOL USA L. L. C. ANDREWS SC 3295 29405GSRFN2900B GS ROOFING PRODS. CO. INC. ( AKA CERTAINTEED CORP.) NORTH CHARLESTON SC 3295 54401M 144RO 3M WAUSAU DOWNTOWN WAUSAU WI Of the 42 reporting facilities, 48% ( 20) are located in Florida. Another 17% ( 7) are located in Michigan. The rest are located in Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Missouri, North Carolina, South Carolina, New York, Ohio and Wisconsin. It is worth noting that Florida is in Region IV, and other facilities are located in Alabama, North Carolina, and South Carolina meaning that 62% ( 26) of the reporting facilities are located in this Region. The map on the following page shows the locations of the facilities reporting to TRI or PCS.

U. S. Census data presented in Table 4 below illustrates industry trends in number of establishments and value of goods shipped between 1992 and 1997. Depending on the sector, changes in the number of establishments range from a 36% increase to a 36% decrease. The change in the value of good shipped also varied by sector, and in general increased.

North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) code 212 covers mining ( except oil and gas) of metallic minerals and nonmetallic minerals, including coal. Advance comparative statistics for 1997 to 2002 for the broader category represented by NAICS code 212 show a 2% decrease in the number of establishments and a 6% increase in the value of shipments ( not adjusted for inflation). See Table 5 below. FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 9 of 35 Table 4. 1992 and 1997 Census Data SIC Industry Segment Number of Establishments Value of Goods Shipped ( billions of dollars)

1997 1992 % Change 1997 1992 % Change 1411 Dimension stone 178 NA NA 0.13 0.10 27.0 1422 Crushed and broken limestone 1,435 1,322 8.5 4.5 3.2 40.7 1423 Crushed and broken granite 290 247 17.4 1.5 0.90 69.0 1429 Crushed and broken stone, n. e. c. 459 428 7.2 1.3 0.93 35.5 1442 Construction sand and gravel 2,367 2,430  2.6 3.5 2.8 26.2 1446 Industrial sand 140 149  6.0 0.51 0.41 24.5 1455 Kaolin and ball clay 35 NA NA 0.94 0.78 20.3 1459 Clay, ceramic, and refractory minerals n. e. c. 132 148  10.8 0.619 0.620 0.1 1474 Potash, soda, and borate minerals 27 NA NA 1.7 1.5 12.4 1475 Phosphate rock 20 NA NA 1.0 1.2  14.5 1479 Chemical and fertilizer mineral mining, n. e. c. 45 70  35.7 0.36 0.42  14.5 1481 Nonmetallic minerals services, except fuels 172 NA NA 0.191 0.189 1.1 1499 Misc. nonmetallic minerals, except fuels 216 270  20.0 0.632 0.596 6.0 3275 Gypsum products 208 153 35.9 4.4 2.1 109.0 Source: 1997 U. S. Economic Census NA indicates that comparable data were not available. FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 10 of 35 Table 5. 1997 and 2002 Census Data NAICS Industry Segment Number of Establishments Value of Goods Shipped ( billions of dollars)

2002 1997 % Change 2002 1997 % Change 212 Mining ( except oil & gas) 7,173 7,348  2 54 51 6 Source: 2002 U. S. Economic Census Wastewater Characteristics and Pollutant Sources Wastewater quantities and content vary day to day, and are affected by rainfall and exposure to surface and underground water. Composition of the wastewater depends on the mineral being mined and the raw materials required for processing. The most important pollutant parameter for this industry is suspended solids.

Many facilities achieve zero discharge by recycling wastewater through the process. Most facilities use settling ponds to control TSS. Aside from pH adjustment, chemical treatment is not common for this industry.

Table 6. Wastewater Flows SIC No. of Major Facilities Reporting Nonzero Flows Median Facility Flow 2000 ( MG) Range of Facility Flows 2000 ( MG) Total Flow 2000 ( MG)

1422 5 2,644.20 913 8499 19,175.60 1442 3 1,334.96 2 3291 4,628.54 1459 3 241.49 100 950 1,291.73 1475 15 429.20 3 3072 10,839.13 1479 2 8,845.50 8,044 9,647 17,691.00 1481 1 4,802.40 NA 4,802.40 Source: PCSLoads2000. NA   no range was calculated because only one facility reported a nonzero flow.

There are three major classifications of wastewater from mining operations: ° Mine dewatering; ° Process water; and ° Rain water runoff. FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 11 of 35 Process wastewater includes water used to transport minerals from one operation to another, water used in separation processes such as flotation and heavy media separation, air pollution control, and dust control. The pollutant concerns for mineral mining wastewater are suspended and dissolved solids. Table 7 presents sources of wastewater for each step of the mining process.

Table 7. Process Sources of Wastewater Mining Process Wastewater Mineral Extraction Surface runoff, groundwater seepage Mineral Transportation Transport water Mineral Processing Transport water, wash water, dust control water, classification water, heavy media separation water, flotation water, solution water, air emissions control water, floor wash down Source: Sector Notebook for Non Fuel, Non Metal Mining, 1995.

Pollutants Discharged Pollutant discharges to surface waters 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 mineral mining facilities, although the single reporting TRI facility discharges a very small amount of toxic weighted pound equivalents ( TWPEs).

PCS: Of the 35 facilities reporting discharges to PCS, two facilities in Michigan discharge 67% of the pounds reported as discharged to this database. Combined, discharges from the six facilities in Michigan account for 72% of the pounds reported discharged. The remaining 27% is contributed by the 17 facilities in Florida. When looking at toxic weighted pounds, discharges reported to PCS by a single facility in Florida ( with two NPDES permit numbers) accounts for 50% of the toxic weighted pound equivalents ( TWPE) discharged by this industry. A second facility in Florida discharges an additional 14% of the PCS TWPE. Overall, the 17 facilities in Florida contribute 78% of the TWPE discharged. An additional 14% is contributed by the three facilities in North Carolina.

TRI: Seven facilities report discharges to TRI. A single facility in Georgia contributes 69% of the pounds reported as discharged to this database. AN additional 30% is contributed by two other FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 12 of 35 facilities, one located in South Carolina and the other in New York. When looking at toxic weighted pounds, discharges reported to TRI by two facilities account for 95% of the TWPE discharged by this industry. A facility in Arkansas accounts for 55% of the TWPE, and a second facility in New York contributes an additional 40%.

Overall: Of the 48 facilities reporting discharges to PCS and TRI, two facilities in Michigan discharge 67% of the pounds reported as discharged to this database. Combined, discharges from the seven facilities in Michigan ( part of Region V) account for 72% of the pounds reported discharged. The remaining 27% is contributed by the 17 facilities in Florida. When looking at toxic weighted pounds, discharges reported to PCS by a single facility in Florida ( with two NPDES permit numbers) accounts for 48% of the TWPE discharged by this industry. A second facility in Florida discharges an additional 14% of the PCS TWPE. Overall, the 17 facilities in Florida contribute 75% of the TWPE discharged. An additional 14% is contributed by the three facilities in North Carolina. Basically, 89% of the TWPE discharged by this industry is discharged by facilities in Region IV.

Discharged pollutants can be characterized as nonconventional, conventional, or priority pollutants. Table 8 below shows the relative contributions of each pollutant type. See Attachment D for the discharges in toxic weighted pounds as reported to PCS by each facility and see Attachment E for the discharges in toxic weighted pounds as reported to TRI by each facility See Attachment F for a breakout of these discharges by pollutant. A discussion of each pollutant type discharged follows the table.

Table 8. Pollutant Discharges Reported to PCS and TRI Pollutant Category & Primary Pollutants PCS LBS PCS TWPE TRI POUNDS TRI TWPE All Pollutants 95,892,593 29,402 479,076 1,137 Nonconventional 91,767,088 28,215 477,573 109 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS 67,076,047 0 0 0 TOTAL FLUORIDE 759,269 26,574 0 0 BARIUM 0 0 17,793 35 NITROGEN, NITRATE TOTAL ( as N) 32 0 443,398 27 Conventional 4,116,305 0 0 0 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS 4,082,539 99%     OIL AND GREASE 33,766 1%     Priority 9,200 1,187 1,503 1,029 LEAD 200 449 184 412 Pollutant Category & Primary Pollutants PCS LBS PCS TWPE TRI POUNDS TRI TWPE FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 13 of 35 ZINC 8,764 410 312 15 COPPER 100 63 750 470 CHROMIUM 0 0 257 132 Nonconventional Pollutants Over 96% of the pounds of both discharged pollutants reported to TRI and PCS and total discharged TWPE are primarily nonconventional pollutants. Total fluoride contributes 97% of the nonconventional TWPE, and 89% of the total TWPE discharged by this industry.

Conventional Pollutants Only 4% of the discharged pounds reported to PCS are conventional pollutants, specifically total suspended solids ( TSS) and Oil and Grease. However, toxic weights are not available for conventional pollutant parameters. No information on conventional pollutants is available through TRI.

Priority Pollutants Priority pollutants contributed only 7% of the total TWPE reportedly discharged by this industry. Among the priority pollutants discharged, lead, copper, and zinc accounted for 81% of the discharged TWPE.

For purposes of comparison, the toxic weighted pound equivalents ( TWPE) for Mineral Mining are presented in the following tables along with the industries reporting the highest discharges in each database. Table 9 presents the information reported to PCS and Table 10 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 9. Mineral 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 40 CFR Part Point Source Category PCS Reported TWPE PCS Rank FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 14 of 35 421 Nonferrous metals manufacturing 434,925 5 440 Ore mining and dressing 383,560 6 410 Textile mills 296,601 7 419 Petroleum refining 198,251 8 455 Pesticide chemicals manufacturing, formulating 178,977 9 418 Fertilizer manufacturing 116,464 10 436 Mineral Mining 29,402 15 Table 10. Mineral 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 10 436 Mineral Mining 1,137 33 FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 15 of 35 Treatment Technology and Pollution Prevention Solids removal: The predominant treatment technique for solids removal involves the use of settling ponds. Other treatment technologies that may be used include flocculation, filters, clarifiers, and thickeners.

Neutralization/ Chemical Precipitation: This treatment technology is often used for removal of dissolved solids such as fluoride, iron, sulfides, and zinc.

Recycle: Facilities recycle settled wastewater to the process.

Table 11. Water Conservation and Pollution Prevention Alternatives Process Water Conservation/ Pollution Prevention Alternatives Surface Runoff Use diversion systems to channel runoff away from exposed mine pits and waste dumps.

Dust Control Reuse contaminated wastewater for dust elimination in the mineral extraction process.

Groundwater Seepage Use subsurface drainage systems and barriers to collect or deflect groundwater prior to contact with exposed mine pits.

Source: Sector Notebook for Non Fuel, Non Metal Mining, 1995.

Concerns Identified Pre Proposal Mineral Mining and Processing was identified by several groups surveyed by the Agency in the process of preparing the 2004/ 2005 Plan. Each group and their suggestions are summarized below.

Previous Suggestions ( Sec. 2.4 of the " Factor 4 Analysis: Implementation and Efficiency Considerations   Status of Screening Level Review Phase" ( Edocket OW 2003 0074 0329) Responders suggested the need for more complete effluent guidelines, including the addition of TSS limits, and were concerned that the existing guidelines are inconsistently applied.

Concerns Identified in Comments to Proposal For the Crushed Stone Subcategory and the Construction Sand and Gravel Subcategory, a commenter asserts that the existing effluent guidelines established by the EPA for the aggregates industry are adequate. The constituents indicative of discharges from aggregate operations are FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 16 of 35 limited, and no new processes have developed within the aggregates industry over the past several decades that would contribute to an increase of constituents discharged. These conclusions are supported by the findings of two reports indicate that the existing guidelines are adequate. These reports are 1) the National Stone Association ( NSA) April 1993 report " An Analysis of the EPA Effluent Guidelines and Standards For the Mineral Mining Industrial Category as Related to the Requirements of the EPA NPDES Storm Water Regulations" and 2) U. S. EPA's June 1982 report from the Office of Water & Waste Management, " The Effects of Discharges from Limestone Quarries on Water Quality and Aquatic Biota"

Followup Contacts Marv Rubin, EPA/ OST/ EAD ( 202) 566 1050 Edward Stone, Maryland Department of Environment, ( 410) 537 5323 Dan Sweeney, EPA Region 3, ( 215) 814 5731 Possible Solutions EPA appreciates all comments and suggestions provided by the stakeholders and EPA Regional staff. However, as with any comments received by the Agency, EPA can not address these suggestions without adequate supporting data. The major issue raised concerned a lack of TSS limitations. Contrary to this stakeholder's assertion, the effluent guidelines for Mineral Minding contain TSS limits for three of the 21 subcategories. For 16 of the remaining 18, limits are set at no discharge of process wastewater with the exception of stormwater or cases in which wet scrubbers, wet processes, or flotation processes. ( The sand and gravel subcategory and the industrial sand category have limits only for pH.) Based on information reported to TRI and PCS, toxic discharges from mineral mining facilities are low relative to other industrial categories. In addition, generally, a few facilities drive the TWPE estimates from both TRI and PCS. 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 absence of revisions to the effluent guidelines, these concerns could be addressed through improved information dissemination and outreach by EPA.

Pollutants Not Covered by the Guidelines: The effluent guidelines do in fact set limits for total suspended solids ( TSS) for three of the 21 subcategories. For 16 of the remaining 18, limits are set at no discharge of process wastewater with the exception of stormwater or cases in which wet scrubbers, wet processes, or flotation processes. ( The sand and gravel subcategory and the industrial sand category have limits only for pH.) In these circumstances, permit writers can use best professional judgement ( BPJ) to set TSS limits for stormwater, and are referred to existing stormwater permits for feasible limits for TSS in stormwater. More complex questions are best addressed through individual discussions with Engineering and Analysis ( EAD) staff. EAD can share these concerns with the Office of Wastewater Management ( OWM) to assist them in implementing multi sector general permits for stormwater. FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 17 of 35 Consistent Application of the Guidelines: Inconsistent application of the guidelines is often the result of lack of information. This condition can best be addressed through improved dissemination of information about the guidelines. EAD can share these concerns with the OWM to assist them in increasing the consistency of application of effluent guidelines.

Summary of Potential Solutions: Concerns identified for this industry could be addressed through improved information dissemination and outreach by EPA. This is especially true due to the concentration of existing mines in Region 4 and in Michigan. The Agency could prepare a fact sheet with answers to frequently asked questions ( FAQs), including information on BPJ for stormwater discharges, and post it on its web site. In addition, the Agency could announce the availability of this fact sheet, and the name of the current EAD staff available to answer questions at the regular meetings for permit writers and pretreatment coordinators held by the OWM and through email alerts to the EAD stakeholder 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 Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 18 of 35 Attachment A EPA Databases and References Used in this Review Overview of 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 Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 19 of 35 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 Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 20 of 35 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 Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 21 of 35 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 Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 22 of 35 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 include:

1997 Economic Census data; and 2002 Economic Census data.

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

US EPA, 1979. Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Mineral Mining and Processing Industry. 440176059b.

US EPA, 1995. Profile of the Non Fuel, Non Metal Mining Industry. Publication # 310 R 95 011.

US Census Bureau. Comparative Statistics for the United States. Accessed at < http:// www. census. gov> on June 28, 2004. FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 23 of 35 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 Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 24 of 35 Attachment C Applicability and Regulatory History Applicability of 40 CFR Part 436 Subpart A   Dimension Stone Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart B   Crushed Stone Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the mining or quarrying and the processing of crushed and broken stone and riprap. This subpart includes all types of rock and stone. Rock and stone that is crushed or broken prior to the extraction of a mineral are elsewhere covered. The processing of calcite, however, in conjunction with the processing of crushed and broken limestone or dolomite is included in this subpart.

Subpart C   Construction Sand and Gravel Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the mining and the processing of sand and gravel for construction or fill uses, except that on board processing of dredged sand and gravel which is subject to the provisions of 33 CFR part 230 of this chapter will not be governed by the provisions of this subpart.

Subpart D   Industrial Sand Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the mining and the processing of sand and gravel for uses other than construction and fill. These uses include, but are not limited to glassmaking, molding, abrasives, filtration, refractories, and refractory bonding.

Subpart E   Gypsum Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of gypsum.

Subpart F   Asphaltic Mineral Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of bituminous limestone, oil impregnated diatomite and oilsonite not primarily as an energy source.

Subpart G   Asbestos and Wollastonite Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of asbestos and wollastonite.

Subpart H   Lightweight Aggregates Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart I   Mica and Sericite Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart J   Barite Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of barite.

Subpart K   Fluorspar Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of fluorspar. FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 25 of 35 Subpart L   Salines From Brine Lakes Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of salines from brine lakes.

Subpart M   Borax Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of borate minerals. Borax obtained from brine lakes is regulated in the salines from brine lakes subcategory ( subpart L of this part).

Subpart N   Potash Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of potash. Potash obtained from brine lakes is regulated in the saline from brine lakes subcategory ( subpart L of this part).

Subpart O   Sodium Sulfate Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of sodium sulfate. Sodium sulfate obtained from brine lakes is regulated in the salines from brine lakes subcategory ( subpart L of this part).

Subpart P   Trona Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart Q   Rock Salt Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart R   Phosphate Rock Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the mining and the processing of phosphate bearing rock, ore or earth for the phosphate content.

Subpart S   Frasch Sulfur Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of sulfur on shore and in marshes and estuaries by the Frasch process. Not covered are sulfur refining operations that are not performed at the mining and collection site.

Subpart T   Mineral Pigments Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart U   Lithium Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart V   Bentonite Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of bentonite.

Subpart W   Magnesite Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of naturally occurring magnesite ore.

Subpart X   Diatomite Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of diatomite.

Subpart Y   Jade Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of jade.

Subpart Z   Novaculite Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 26 of 35 processing of novaculite.

Subpart AA   Fire Clay Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart AB   Attapulgite and Montmorillonite Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart AC   Kyanite Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart AD   Shale and Common Clay Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart AE   Aplite Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart AF   Tripoli Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the processing of tripoli.

Subpart AG   Kaolin Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart AH   Ball Clay Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart AI   Feldspar Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart AJ   Talc, Steatite, Soapstone and Pyrophyllite Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart AK   Garnet Subcategory [ Reserved]

Subpart AL   Graphite Subcategory. The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the mining and processing of naturally occurring graphite.

REGULATORY BACKGROUND Regulatory History Interim final regulations were published October 16, 1975 for Subparts E, F, G, J, K, L, N, O, S, V, W, X, Y, Z, AF, and AL.

Proposed regulations were issued June 10, 1976 for Subparts B, C, D, E, F, G, J, K, L, M, N, O, R, S, V, W, X, Y, Z, AF, and AL.

Final versions of the effluent limitations for Subparts B, C, D, and R were published July 1979. National Amendments were made to the effluent Guidelines December 28, 1979. FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 27 of 35 Existing Limitations Limitations for BAT are the same as BPT for all subcategories except industrial sand HF floatation; rock salt; sulphur ( frasch process, salt dome operations); feldspar flotation; and talc ( heavy media and flotation). Limitations for NSPS are the same as BAT. EPA established no limitations for PSES or PSNS.

The following processes are required to achieve no discharge of process generated waste water pollutants to navigable waters:

 A. Dimension Stone;

 B. Crushed Stone ( dry process only);

 C. Construction Sand and Gravel ( dry process only);

 D. Industrial Sand ( dry process only);

 E. Gypsum;

 F. Asphaltic Minerals: ° bituminous limestone; ° oil impregnated diatomite; ° gilsonite;

 G. Asbestos and Wollastonite;

 H. Lightweight Aggregates: ° perlite; ° pumice; ° vermiculite;

 I. Mica and Sericite: ° mica and sericite ( dry process); ° mica ( wet process, grinding process); ° mica ( wet beneficiation process);

 J. Barite ( dry process only);

 K. Fluorspar ( heavy media separation process only);

 M. Borax;

 N. Potash;

 O. Sodium Sulfate;

 P. Trona;

 S. Sulfur ( anhydrite only);

 T. Mineral Pigments;

 V. Bentonite;

 W. Magnesite;

 X. Diatomite;

 Y. Jade;

 Z. Novaculite;

 AA. Fire Clay;

 AB. Fuller's Earth ( montmorillonite and attapulgite);

 AC. Kyanite; FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 28 of 35  AD. Shale and Common Clay;

 AE. Aplite;

 AF. Tripoli;

 AG. Kaolin ( general purpose grade);

 AH. Ball Clay;

 AI. Feldspar ( non flotation processes); and  AJ. Talc Group ( dry and washing processes).

The concentration based limitations presented in Table C 1 apply to discharges from wet processes, flotation processes, mine dewatering, and dredging for the crushed stone, construction sand and gravel, and industrial sand subcategories of 40 CFR Part 436. Dry processes for these subcategories are required to achieve no discharge of process wastewater. Concentration based limits for other subcategories of Part 436 are presented in Table C 2.

Table C 1. Effluent Guidelines for Crushed Stone, Construction Sand and Gravel, and Industrial Sand Subcategories of Part 436 Parameter BPT 30 day averages ( mg/ L) BPT daily maximum ( mg/ L)

TSSa 25 45 pH within range of 6 to 9 within range of 6 to 9 aBPT limits for industrial sand HF flotation for TSS are 0.023kg/ kkg ( monthly avg) and 0.046 kg/ kkg ( daily maximum), and 0.003 kg/ kkg ( monthly avg) and 0.006 kg/ kkg ( daily maximum) for fluoride. BAT requires no discharge.

Table C 2. Effluent Guidelines for Other Subcategoriesa of Part 436 Parameter BPT 30 day averages ( mg/ L) BPT daily maximum ( mg/ L)

TSS 10 to 50 20 to 100 Total ironb 1 to 3.5 2 to 7 Sulfidec 1 to 5 2 to 10 Zincd 0.25 0.50 aSubcategories include barite mine dewatering, phosphate rock, sulfur ( frasch, salt dome operations), fire clay acid mine drainage, kaoline ( wet process), talc ( mine dewatering), and graphite. bTotal iron limits for barite mine dewatering, fire clay acid mine drainage, and graphte only. cSulfide limits for Sulfur ( frasch, salt dome operations) only. BAT limits for sulfur are 1 to 2 mg/ L ( monthly avg) and 2 to 4 mg/ L ( daily maximum). dZinc limits for Kaolin wet processing only. FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 29 of 35 The limitations guidelines in Table C 3 are normalized on the basis of metric ton ( kkg) of raw material.

Table C 3. Normalized Effluent Guidelines for Subcategoriesa of Part 436 Parameter BPT 30 day averages ( kg/ kkg) BPT daily maximum ( kg/ kkg)

TSSb, c 0.02 to 1.5 0.04 to 3.0 Fluorided 0.175 0.35 Dissolved fluoridee 0.2 0.4 aSubcategories include feldspar floatation; talc, steatite, soapstone, and pyrophyllite ( heavy media separation and flotation); mica wet beneficiation process ( ceramic grade clay by product); fluorspar flotation; and rock salt. bBAT limits for TSS for talc ( heavy media and flotation) are 0.3 kg/ kkg ( monthly avg) and 0.6 kg/ kkg ( daily maximum). cBAT limits for TSS for rock salt are 0.002 kg/ kkg ( monthly avg) and 0.004 kg/ kkg ( daily maximum). dFluoride limits for feldspar flotation only. BAT limits for fluoride are 0.13 kg/ kkg ( monthly avg) and 0.26 ( daily maximum). eDissolved fluoride limits for fluorspar flotation only. FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 30 of 35 Attachment D PCS Discharges SIC NPDES ID NAME CITY Flow ( MGD) LBS/ YR TWPE Percent of Total SIC TWPE Cumulative Percent of Total SIC TWPE 1422 MI0026514 STONECO INC OTTAWA LAKE OTTAWA LAKE 3 2,731,974 14 79% 79%

1422 MI0045802 ROCKWOOD QUARRY LLC NEWPORT 4 35,725,744 4 21% 100%

1422 MI0003468 LAFARGE N AMERICA STONEPORT PRESQUE ISLE 15 490,997 1422 MI0004111 MICH LIMESTONE ROGERS CITY ROGERS CITY 23 905,684 1422 AL0003662 SYLACAUGA OPERATIONS IMERYS SYLACAUGA 7 118,539 1422 MI0051195 THOMPSON MCCULLY QUARRY CO NEWPORT 0 0 1422 TOTAL 53 39,972,938 17 1442 MI0001368 US SILICA CO ROCKWOOD 9 301,473 1,097 76% 76%

1442 MI0044491 SYLVANIA MINERALS SOUTH ROCKWOOD 4 29,085,018 343 24% 100%

1442 NY0006173 STONE WASH PLANT PLEASANT VALLEY 0 44 1442 AZ0024384 SAN XAVIER ROCK & MATERIALS CORTARO 0 0 1442 TOTAL 13 29,386,535 1,441 1459 NC0000353 FELDSPAR CORP. / SPRUCE PINE SPRUCE PINE 3 554,264 2,623 66% 66%

1459 NC0000400 K T FELDSPAR CORPORATION SPRUCE PINE 0.28 79,472 862 22% 88%

1459 NC0000175 UNIMIN CORPORATION / QUARTZ SPRUCE PINE 1 74,516 491 12% 100%

1459 TOTAL 4 708,251 3,976 1475 FL0000230 IMC AGRICO CO  NORALYN/ PHO. MULBERRY 8 8,713,689 4,149 51% 51%

1475 FL0001902 US AGRI CHEMICALS FT MEADE FORT MEADE 4 4,723,294 1,418 17% 68%

1475 FL0000353 IMC AGRICO CO  PAYNE CK MINE MULBERRY 3 689,813 687 8% 76%

1475 FL0037958 CARGILL FERT S FT MEADE MINE NICHOLS 1 3,919,551 497 6% 82%

1475 FL0000311 AGRIFOS L. L. C.  NICHOLS MINE NICHOLS 4 1,819,911 429 5% 88%

1475 FL0000256 IMC AGRICO CO  KINGSFORD MULBERRY 1 432,136 326 4% 92%

1475 FL0033294 CARGILL FERT. HOOKERS PRARIE BARTOW 0.46 482,411 205 3% 94%

1475 FL0000671 CARGILL FERTILIZER INC. MULBERRY 0.23 57,992 199 2% 97%

1475 FL0032590 IMC AGRICO CO  HOPEWELL MULBERRY 1 389,976 150 2% 98% SIC NPDES ID NAME CITY Flow ( MGD) LBS/ YR TWPE Percent of Total SIC TWPE Cumulative Percent of Total SIC TWPE FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 31 of 35 1475 FL0000264 IMC AGRICO CO  PORT SUTTON MULBERRY 3 124,317 113 1% 100%

1475 FL0033332 IMC AGRICO CO  LONESOME MULBERRY 0 20,575 12 0% 100%

1475 FL0027600 IMC AGRICO CO  FT GREEN MINE MULBERRY 0 3,066 4 0%

1475 FL0001198 CARGILL FERT. FT. MEADE MINE FT MEADE 1 225,886 1 0%

1475 FL0038652 FARMLAND HYDRO L. P. TAMPA 2 11,707 0 0%

1475 FL0032522 NU GULF INDUSTRIES INC MYAKKA CITY 0 93,936 1475 FL0036412 IMC AGRICO CO  FOUR CORNERS MULBERRY 0 0 1475 FL0040177 CF INDUSTRIES  HARDEE COMPLEX WAUCHULA 0 0 1475 FL0035271 C F INDUSTRIES  HARDEE WAUCHULA 0 0 1475 TOTAL 30 21,708,260 8,190 1479 FL0000655 PCS PHOSPHATE WHITE SPRINGS WHITE SPRINGS 22 2,104,249 8,658 59% 59%

1479 FL0036226 PCS PHOSPAHTE WHITE SPRINGS WHITE SPRINGS 26 1,955,319 6,069 41% 100%

1479 LA0068250 FREEPORT SULP CO CAMINADA MINE GULF OF MEXICO 0 0 1479 TOTAL 48 4,059,568 14,727 1481 MO0002003 DOE RUN BUICK MINE VIBURNUM 13 58,831 1,051 100% 100%

1481 TOTAL 13 58,831 1,051 FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 32 of 35 Attachment E TRI Discharges SIC Code Facility TRI ID Facility Name Facility City Facility State Direct lbs Direct TWPE Indirect lbs Indirect TWPE Total lbs Total TWPE Percent Total of SIC TWPE Cumulativ e Percent Total of SIC TWPE 3275 43433NTDSTGYPSU UNITED STATES GYPSUM CO. GYPSUM OH 50 0.005 50 0.005 100% 100%

3275 Total 50 0.005 3295 72216M POBOX 3M LITTLE ROCK AR 1,515 631 1,515 631 55% 55%

3295 14305TMCRM4511H FERRO ELECTRONIC MATERIALS NIAGARA FALLS NY 18,032 450 18,032 450 40% 95%

3295 31404KTLST1800E ENGELHARD CORP.

SAVANNAH OPS. SAVANNAH GA 359,000 45 359,000 45 4% 99%

3295 29510MTCHMROSEMTREBOL USA L. L. C. ANDREWS SC 100,398 6 100,398 6 1% 100%

3295 54401M 144RO 3M WAUSAU DOWNTOWN WAUSAU WI 3 1 53 4 56 5 0% 100%

3295 29405GSRFN2900B GS ROOFING PRODS. CO.

INC. ( AKA CERTAINTEED CORP.) NORTH CHARLESTON SC 5 0.012 20 0.047 25 0.059 0% 100%

3295 Total 479,026 1,137 FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 33 of 35 Attachment F Reported Pollutant Loadings SIC Pollutant Name CAS Pollutan t Group Code PCS TRI Indirect Discharges TRI Direct Discharges Facilities Reportin g Pollutant Pounds TWPE Facilities Reportin g Pollutant Pounds TWPE Facilities Reporting Pollutant Pounds TWPE 1422 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS C009 CP 6 1,698,463 1422 OIL AND GREASE C035 CP 1 613 1422 SUM OF CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 1,699,076 0 0 0 0 0 1422 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS C010 NC 3 38,117,253 1422 SUM OF NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 38,117,253 0 0 0 0 0 1422 SILVER 7440224 PP 2 0 4 1422 SUM OF PRIORITY POLLUTANTS 0 4 0 0 0 0 1442 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS C009 CP 4 198,936 1442 SUM OF CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 198,936 0 0 0 0 0 1442 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS C010 NC 1 28,958,794 1442 SULFATE 14808798 NC 1 361 0.0020 1442 PHOSPHORUS 7723140 NC 1 421 1442 TOTAL SULFIDE 18496258 NC 1 218 610 1442 SUM OF NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 28,959,793 610 0 0 0 0 1442 SILVER 7440224 PP 1 3 45 1442 THALLIUM 7440280 PP 1 11 11 1442 BERYLLIUM 7440417 PP 1 72 77 1442 SUM OF PRIORITY POLLUTANTS 86 132 0 0 0 0 1459 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS C009 CP 3 501,083 1459 SUM OF CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 501,083 0 0 0 0 0 SIC Pollutant Name CAS Pollutan t Group Code PCS TRI Indirect Discharges TRI Direct Discharges Facilities Reportin g Pollutant Pounds TWPE Facilities Reportin g Pollutant Pounds TWPE Facilities Reporting Pollutant Pounds TWPE FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 34 of 35 1459 CHLORIDE 16887006 NC 1 84,431 2 1459 TOTAL FLUORIDE 16984488 NC 3 113,535 3,974 1459 SUM OF NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 197,966 3,976 0 0 0 0 1475 OIL AND GREASE C035 CP 7 23,210 1475 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS C009 CP 16 672,950 1475 SUM OF CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 696,160 0 0 0 0 0 1475 AMMONIA AS NITROGEN 7664417 NC 7 10,377 19 1475 NITROGEN, NITRATE TOTAL ( AS N) 14797558 NC 2 32 0.0020 1475 NITROGEN, ORGANIC TOTAL ( AS N) 17778880 NC 1 6,030 1475 SODIUM 7440235 NC 1 66,248 0.36 1475 SULFATE 14808798 NC 14 18,428,674 103 1475 TOTAL FLUORIDE 16984488 NC 14 230,504 8,068 1475 TOTAL PHOSPHORUS 14265442 NC 1 4,380 1475 NITROGEN, TOTAL ( AS N) 7727379 NC 17 1,102,896 1475 PHOSPHORUS 7723140 NC 17 191,876 1475 SUM OF NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 20,041,018 8,190 0 0 0 0 0 1479 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS C009 CP 3 971,333 1479 SUM OF CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 971,333 0 0 0 0 0 0 1479 PHOSPHORUS 7723140 NC 2 1,244,342 1479 TOTAL FLUORIDE 16984488 NC 2 415,230 14,533 1479 NITROGEN, TOTAL ( AS N) 7727379 NC 2 420,099 1479 AMMONIA AS NITROGEN 7664417 NC 2 116,832 194 1479 TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN C021 NC 2 97,960 SIC Pollutant Name CAS Pollutan t Group Code PCS TRI Indirect Discharges TRI Direct Discharges Facilities Reportin g Pollutant Pounds TWPE Facilities Reportin g Pollutant Pounds TWPE Facilities Reporting Pollutant Pounds TWPE FINAL DRAFT Mineral Mining August 12, 2004 Page 35 of 35 1479 SUM OF NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 2,294,464 14,727 0 0 0 0 0 1481 OIL AND GREASE C035 CP 1 9,943 1481 TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS C009 CP 1 39,773 1481 SUM OF CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 49,717 0 0 0 0 0 0 1481 CADMIUM 7440439 PP 1 50 130 1481 COPPER 7440508 PP 1 100 63 1481 LEAD 7439921 PP 1 200 449 1481 ZINC 7440666 PP 1 8,764 410 1481 SUM OF PRIORITY POLLUTANTS 9,114 1,051 0 0 0 0 0 3275 GLYCOL ETHERS N230 NC 1 50 0 3275 SUM OF NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 0 0 0 0 1 50 0 3295 AMMONIA AS NITROGEN 7664417 NC 1 16,000 24 3295 BARIUM 7440393 NC 1 17,793 35 3295 FORMALDEHYDE 50000 NC 1 20 0.05 1 5 0.01 3295 MANGANESE 7439965 NC 1 51 4 1 255 18 3295 NITROGEN, NITRATE TOTAL ( AS N) 14797558 NC 2 443,398 27 3295 SUM OF NONCONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS 0 0 17,865 39 459,658 70 3295 ZINC 7440666 PP 2 56 3 2 256 12 3295 CHROMIUM 7440473 PP 2 257 132 3295 COPPER 7440508 PP 1 750 470 3295 LEAD 7439921 PP 1 184 412 3295 SUM OF PRIORITY POLLUTANTS 0 0 240 415 1,263 614


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 71 (Tuesday, April 14, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19982-19983]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08489]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OARM-2014-0858; 9924-38-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Drug Testing for Contractor Employees
(Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``Drug Testing for Contractor
Employees (Renewal)'' (EPA ICR No. 2183.06, OMB Control No.

2030-0044) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently
approved through April 30, 2015. Public comments were previously
requested via the Federal Register (80 FR 6704) on February 6, 2015
during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30
days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given
below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency
may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before May 14, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OARM-2014-0858, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA
Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dianne Lyles, Policy Training and
Oversight Division, Office of Acquisition Management (3802R),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: 202-
565-2553; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the
EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR.
The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at
the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-
1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The EPA uses contractors to perform services throughout
the nation in response to environmental emergencies involving the
release, or threatened release, of oil, radioactive materials or
hazardous chemicals that may potentially affect communities and the
surrounding environment. Contractors responding to any of these types
of incidents may be responsible for testing their employees for the use
of marijuana, cocaine, opiates, amphetamines, phencyclidine (PCP), and
any other controlled substances. The testing for drugs must be
completed prior to contract employee performance in accordance with 5
CFR 731.104 (Appointments Subject to Investigation), 732.201
(Sensitivity Level Designations and Investigative Requirements), and
736.102 (Notice to Investigative Sources). The contractor shall
maintain records associated with all drug tests.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Private Contractors.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Required to obtain or retain a
benefit per 5 CFR 731.104, 732.201, and 736.102.
    Estimated number of respondents: 450.
    Frequency of response: Annual.
    Total estimated burden: 1,013 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $108,783 (per year), includes $0 annualized
capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the hours in the
total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently
approved by OMB.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-08489 Filed 4-13-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 168 (Tuesday, August 30, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 59713]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20812]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. 2016-95]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Fusion
Flight, LLC

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of 14 CFR. The purpose of this notice is to
improve the public's awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of
FAA's regulatory activities. Neither publication of this notice nor the
inclusion or omission of information in the summary is intended to
affect the legal status of the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before September 19, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2016-
5847 using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thuy H. Cooper,<PHONE_NUMBER>. 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591. This notice is published
pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 19, 2016.
Dale Bouffiou,
Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking,

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2016-5847.
    Petitioner: Fusion Flight, LLC.
    Sections of 14 CFR Affected: 61.113, 91.151, 91.119, and 91.12.
    Description of Relief Sought: Fusion Flight requests an exemption
to operate an unmanned and autonomous aircraft that ascends, powered by
a jet engine, on a ballistic trajectory up to 16.2 km (53,150 ft) AGL
and descends, once its fuel is consumed, under parachute. The
petitioner's purpose is to investigate the feasibility of constructing
a launch vehicle with a jet-engine powered first stage, which if
possible, has the potential to greatly reduce the cost of sending
payloads into space.
[FR Doc. 2016-20812 Filed 8-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 12, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 7)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 1529-1533]
[DOCID:fr12ja10-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1226; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-149-AD;
Amendment 39-16164; AD 2008-10-10 R1]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700,
-700C, -800, and -900 Series Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is revising an existing airworthiness directive (AD),
which applies to certain Model 737-600, -700, -700C, -800, and -900
series airplanes. That AD currently requires revising the Airworthiness
Limitations (AWLs) section of the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness by incorporating new limitations for fuel tank systems to
satisfy Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88 requirements. That
AD also requires an initial inspection to phase in certain repetitive
AWL inspections, and repair if necessary. This AD clarifies the
intended effect of the AD on spare and on-airplane fuel tank system
components. This AD results from a design review of the fuel tank
systems. We are issuing this AD to prevent the potential for ignition
sources inside fuel tanks caused by latent failures, alterations,
repairs, or maintenance actions, which, in combination with flammable
fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion and consequent loss
of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective January 27, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of January 27,
2010.
    On June 12, 2008 (73 FR 25986, May 8, 2008), the Director of the
Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain
other publication listed in the AD.
    We must receive any comments on this AD by February 26, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box
3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
https://www.myboeingfleet.com.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Thorson, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone
(425) 917-6508; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On April 29, 2008, we issued AD 2008-10-10, Amendment 39-15516 (73
FR 25986, May 8, 2008). That AD applied to certain Model 737-600, -700,
-700C, -800, and -900 series airplanes. That AD required revising the
Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) section of the Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness (ICA) by incorporating new limitations for fuel
tank systems to satisfy Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 88
requirements. That AD also requires an initial inspection to phase in
certain repetitive AWL inspections, and repair if necessary. That AD
resulted from a design review of the fuel tank systems. The actions
specified in that AD are intended to prevent the potential for ignition
sources inside fuel tanks caused by latent failures, alterations,
repairs, or maintenance actions, which, in combination with flammable
fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion and consequent loss
of the airplane.
    Critical design configuration control limitations (CDCCLs) are
limitation requirements to preserve a critical ignition source
prevention feature of the fuel tank system design that is necessary to
prevent the occurrence of an unsafe condition. The purpose of a CDCCL
is to provide instruction to retain the critical ignition source
prevention feature during configuration change that may be caused by
alterations, repairs, or maintenance actions. A CDCCL is not a periodic
inspection.

Actions Since AD Was Issued

    Since we issued that AD, we have determined that it is necessary to
clarify the AD's intended effect on spare and on-airplane fuel tank
system components, regarding the use of maintenance manuals and
instructions for continued airworthiness.
    Section 91.403(c) of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
91.403(c)) specifies the following:

    No person may operate an aircraft for which a manufacturer's
maintenance manual or instructions for continued airworthiness has
been issued that contains an airworthiness limitation section unless
the mandatory * * * procedures * * * have been complied with.

Some operators have questioned whether existing components affected by
the new CDCCLs must be reworked. We did not intend for the AD to
retroactively require rework of components that had been maintained
using acceptable methods before the effective date of the AD. Owners
and operators of the affected airplanes therefore are not required to
rework affected components identified as airworthy or installed on the
affected airplanes before the required revisions of the AWLs. But once
the CDCCLs are incorporated into the AWLs, future maintenance actions
on components must be done in accordance with those CDCCLs.

Relevant Service Information

    AD 2008-10-10 cites Boeing Temporary Revision 09-020, dated March
2008, to the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD)
Document, D626A001-CMR. Since we issued that AD, Boeing has revised
Section 9 of the referenced service information. We have reviewed the
revised document. Section 9, Revision September 2009, dated September
2009, of Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 MPD, Document D626A001-CMR, adds no
new procedures in regard to fuel tank safety. We have added paragraph
(l) of this AD to give credit for actions required by paragraphs (g)
and (h) of this AD that were done before the effective date of this AD
in accordance with Section 9, Revision September 2009, dated September
2009, of Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR, and the
following earlier revisions: Revision March 2008, Revision April 2008,
Revision June 2008, Revision February 2009, Revision March 2009, and
Revision August 2009.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    The unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or
develop on other airplanes of the same type design. For this reason, we
are issuing this AD to revise AD 2008-10-10. This new AD retains the
requirements of the existing AD, and adds a new note to clarify the
intended effect of the AD on spare and on-airplane fuel tank system
components.

Explanation of Additional Changes to AD

    AD 2008-10-10 allowed the use of alternative inspections,
intervals, or CDCCLs if they are part of a later revision of the Boeing
737-600/700/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR, Revision March 2008. AD
2008-10-10 also allowed the use of later revisions of the Boeing 737-
600/700/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR. Those provisions have been
removed from this AD. Allowing the use of ``a later revision'' or
``later FAA-approved revisions'' of specific service documents violates
Office of the Federal Register regulations for approving materials that
are incorporated by reference. Affected operators, however, may request
approval to use a later revision or an alternative CDCCL, inspection,
or interval, that is part of a later revision of the referenced service
documents as an alternative method of compliance, under the provisions
of paragraph (m) of this AD.
    We have revised paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), (g)(3), and (h) of this
AD to remove the term ``Revision March 2008 of the MPD,'' which is
defined in paragraph (f) of this AD. We have provided the full document
citation throughout this AD to avoid any confusion about which specific
document is being referenced. However, we have not removed the
``Service Information Reference'' paragraph from this AD. Because this
AD revises AD 2008-10-10, we cannot change paragraph references, which
would adversely affect compliance. Therefore, we have determined that
leaving paragraph (f) of this AD unchanged is a

less burdensome approach for operators, while still adhering to
standard drafting guidance.
    We have revised this AD to identify the legal name of the
manufacturer as published in the most recent type certificate data
sheet for the affected airplane models.

Costs of Compliance

    This revision imposes no additional economic burden. The current
costs for this AD are repeated for the convenience of affected
operators, as follows:
    There are about 1,960 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs, at
an average labor rate of $80 per work hour, for U.S. operators to
comply with this AD.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
            Action               Work hours          Parts           Cost per       registered      Fleet cost
                                                                     airplane        airplanes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AWLs revision................               8  None.............            $640             682        $436,480
Inspection...................               8  None.............             640             682         436,480
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    This revision merely clarifies the intended effect on spare and on-
airplane fuel tank system components, and makes no substantive change
to the AD's requirements. For this reason, it is found that notice and
opportunity for prior public comment for this action are unnecessary,
and good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than
30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to
provide your comments before it becomes effective. However, we invite
you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this AD. Send
your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include
``Docket No. FAA-2009-1226; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-149-AD'' at
the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the
overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this
AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may
amend this AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part
39) as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Amendment 39-15516 (73 FR
25986, May 8, 2008) and adding the following new AD:

2008-10-10 R1 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-16164. Docket No.
FAA-2009-1226; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-149-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective January 27,
2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD revises AD 2008-10-10, Amendment 39-15516.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-600, -700, -
700C, -800, and -900 series airplanes, certificated in any category,
with an original standard airworthiness certificate or original
export certificate of airworthiness issued before March 31, 2006.

    Note 1: Airplanes with an original standard airworthiness
certificate or original export certificate of airworthiness issued
on or after March 31, 2006, must already be in compliance with the
airworthiness limitations specified in this AD because those
limitations were applicable as part of the airworthiness
certification of those airplanes.

    Note 2: This AD requires revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new inspections. Compliance with
these inspections is required by 14 CFR

91.403(c). For airplanes that have been previously modified,
altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by these inspections,
the operator may not be able to accomplish the inspections described
in the revisions. In this situation, to comply with 14 CFR
91.403(c), the operator must request approval for an alternative
method of compliance (AMOC) according to paragraph (m) of this AD.
The request should include a description of changes to the required
inspections that will ensure the continued operational safety of the
airplane.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from a design review of the fuel tank
systems. We are issuing this AD to prevent the potential for
ignition sources inside fuel tanks caused by latent failures,
alterations, repairs, or maintenance actions, which, in combination
with flammable fuel vapors, could result in a fuel tank explosion
and consequent loss of the airplane.

Compliance

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

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2008-10-10, With Revised Service
Information

Service Information Reference

    (f) The term ``Revision March 2008 of the MPD,'' as used in this
AD, means Boeing Temporary Revision (TR) 09-020, dated March 2008,
to the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD)
Document, D626A001-CMR, Revision March 2008.

Revision to Airworthiness Limitations (AWLs) Section

    (g) Before December 16, 2008, revise the AWLs section of the
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) by incorporating into
the MPD the information in the subsections specified in paragraphs
(g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD; except that the initial
inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD must be done at the
applicable compliance time specified in that paragraph.
    (1) Subsection E, ``AIRWORTHINESS LIMITATIONS--FUEL SYSTEMS,''
of Boeing TR 09-020, dated March 2008, to the Boeing 737-600/700/
800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR, Revision March 2008; or of
Section 9, Revision September 2009, dated September 2009, of the
Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 Maintenance Planning Data (MPD) Document,
D626A001-CMR.
    (2) Subsection F, ``PAGE FORMAT: FUEL SYSTEM AIRWORTHINESS
LIMITATIONS,'' of Boeing TR 09-020, dated March 2008, to the Boeing
737-600/700/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR, Revision March 2008;
or Section 9, Revision September 2009, dated September 2009, of the
Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR.
    (3) Subsection G, ``AIRWORTHINESS LIMITATIONS--FUEL SYSTEM
AWLs,'' AWLs No. 28-AWL-01 through No. 28-AWL-22 inclusive, of
Boeing TR 09-020, dated March 2008, to the Boeing 737-600/700/800/
900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR, Revision March 2008; or Section 9,
Revision September 2009, dated September 2009, of the Boeing 737-
600/700/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR. As an optional action,
AWLs No. 28-AWL-23 and No. 28-AWL-24, as identified in Subsection G
of Boeing TR 09-020, dated March 2008, to the Boeing 737-600/700/
800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR, Revision March 2008; or Section
9, Revision September 2009, dated September 2009, of the Boeing 737-
600/700/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR; also may be incorporated
into the AWLs section of the ICA.

Initial Inspection and Repair if Necessary

    (h) At the later of the compliance times specified in paragraphs
(h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD, do a special detailed inspection of
the lightning shield to ground termination on the out-of-tank fuel
quantity indication system (FQIS) wiring to verify functional
integrity, in accordance with AWL No. 28-AWL-03 of Subsection G of
Boeing TR 09-020, dated March 2008, to the Boeing 737-600/700/800/
900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR, Revision March 2008; or Section 9,
Revision September 2009, dated September 2009, of the Boeing 737-
600/700/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR. If any discrepancy is
found during the inspection, repair the discrepancy before further
flight in accordance with AWL No. 28-AWL-03 of Subsection G of
Boeing TR 09-020, dated March 2008, to the Boeing 737-600/700/800/
900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR, Revision March 2008; or Section 9,
Revision September 2009, dated September 2009, of the Boeing 737-
600/700/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR. Accomplishing AWL No.
28-AWL-03 as part of an FAA-approved maintenance program before the
applicable compliance time specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2)
of this AD constitutes compliance with the requirements of this
paragraph.

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

    (1) Within 120 months since the date of issuance of the original
standard airworthiness certification or the date of issuance of the
original export certificate of airworthiness.
    (2) Within 24 months after June 12, 2008 (the effective date of
AD 2008-10-10).

No Alternative Inspections, Inspection Intervals, or Critical Design
Configuration Control Limitations (CDCCLs)

    (i) After accomplishing the actions specified in paragraphs (g)
and (h) of this AD, no alternative inspections, inspection
intervals, or CDCCLs may be used unless the inspections, intervals,
or CDCCLs are approved as an AMOC in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (m) of this AD.

Credit for Actions Done According to Previous Revisions of the MPD

    (j) Actions done before June 12, 2008, in accordance with the
following MPDs are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding
requirements of paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD: Section 9 of the
Boeing 737-600/700/700C/700IGW/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR,
Revision March 2006; Revision May 2006; Revision October 2006;
Revision November 2006; or Revision November 2006 R1; or Section 9
of the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 MPD Document, D626A001-CMR,
Revision March 2007; Revision March 2007 R1; Revision March 2007 R2;
or Revision February 2008.

Terminating Action for AD 2008-06-03, Amendment 39-15415

    (k) Incorporating AWLs No. 28-AWL-21, No. 28-AWL-22, and No. 28-
AWL-24 into the AWLs section of the ICA in accordance with paragraph
(g) of this AD terminates the action required by paragraph (h)(1) of
AD 2008-06-03.

New Information

Explanation of CDCCL Requirements

    Note 4: Notwithstanding any other maintenance or operational
requirements, components that have been identified as airworthy or
installed on the affected airplanes before the revision of the AWLs,
as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, do not need to be reworked
in accordance with the CDCCLs. However, once the AWLs have been
revised, future maintenance actions on these components must be done
in accordance with the CDCCLs.

Credit for Actions Done According to Previous Revisions of the MPD

    (l) Actions done before the effective date of this AD, in
accordance with the following MPDs are acceptable for compliance
with the corresponding requirements of paragraphs (g) and (h) of
this AD: Section 9 of the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 MPD Document,
D626A001-CMR, Revision March 2008; Revision April 2008; Revision
June 2008; Revision February 2009; Revision March 2009; or Revision
August 2009.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (m)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to
ATTN: Thomas Thorson, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-
140S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue,
SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
(425) 917-6590. Or, e-mail information to 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOC-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal

inspector, your local FSDO. The AMOC approval letter must
specifically reference this AD.
    (3) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2008-10-10
are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (n) You must use Boeing Temporary Revision 09-020, dated March
2008, to the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 Maintenance Planning Data
(MPD) Document D626A001-CMR; or Section 9, Revision September 2009,
dated September 2009, of the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 MPD
Document, D626A001-CMR; to do the actions required by this AD,
unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of Section 9, Revision September 2009,
dated September 2009, of the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 MPD
Document, D626A001-CMR, under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) The Director of the Federal Register previously approved the
incorporation by reference of Boeing Temporary Revision 09-020,
dated March 2008, to the Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 Maintenance
Planning Data (MPD) Document, D626A001-CMR, on June 12, 2008 (73 FR
25986, May 8, 2008).
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207; telephone
206-544-5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 23, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-31031 Filed 1-11-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P