[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 217 (Thursday, November 10, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67834-67837]
[FR Doc No: 2022-24419]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 217 / Thursday, November 10, 2022 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0991; Project Identifier AD-2022-00155-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Learjet, Inc., Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is revising a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
that applied to certain Learjet, Inc., Model 45 airplanes. This action
revises the NPRM by adding airplanes to the applicability. The FAA is
proposing this airworthiness directive (AD) to address the unsafe
condition on these products. Since these actions would impose an
additional burden over that in the NPRM, the FAA is requesting comments
on this SNPRM.

DATES: The comment period for the NPRM published in the Federal
Register on August 11, 2022 (87 FR 49556), is reopened.
    The FAA must receive comments on this SNPRM by December 27, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2022-0991; or in person at Docket Operations between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this SNPRM, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For service information identified in this SNPRM, contact
Learjet, Inc., One Learjet Way, Wichita, KS 67209-2942; telephone 316-
946-2000; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email bombardier.com">[email protected]bombardier.com; website
bombardier.com.
     You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adam Hein, Aerospace Engineer,
Mechanical Systems and Propulsion Section, FAA, Wichita ACO Branch,
1801 S Airport Road, Wichita, KS 67209; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-0991; Project Identifier
AD-2022-00155-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may again
revise this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The
agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this proposed AD.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this SNPRM contain
commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as
private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or
responsive to this SNPRM, it is important that you clearly designate
the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission
containing CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked
submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed
in the public docket of this SNPRM. Submissions containing CBI should
be sent to Adam Hein, Aerospace Engineer, Mechanical Systems and
Propulsion Section, FAA, Wichita ACO Branch, 1801 S Airport Road,
Wichita, KS 67209; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].
Any commentary that the FAA receives that is not specifically
designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this
rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued an NPRM to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that
would apply to certain Learjet, Inc., Model 45 airplanes airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on August 11, 2022 (87 FR
49556). The NPRM was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. In the NPRM, the
FAA proposed to require revising the existing inspection program to
incorporate reduced inspection intervals for the anti-ice manifold
assembly.

Related Rulemaking

    The FAA issued AD 2001-03-05, Amendment 39-12109 (66 FR 10353,
February 15, 2001) (AD 2001-03-05), for certain Learjet Model 45
airplanes. AD 2001-03-05 requires, among other actions, revising the
existing Learjet 45 maintenance program to incorporate additional
inspections and maintenance practices for the anti-ice manifold
assembly, including a 600-hour repetitive inspection interval of an
earlier design/part number of the anti-ice manifold. Since the FAA
issued AD

2001-03-05, the anti-ice manifold was redesigned and the inspection
interval was extended to 1,200 flight hours. The design approval holder
subsequently determined that the design improvements made to the anti-
ice manifold assembly did not fully address the original issue of vane
cracking, so the 1,200-hour inspection on the redesigned part is
insufficient. However, the FAA determined that a repetitive inspection
interval of 600 flight hours is sufficient to address the unsafe
condition. Therefore, this proposed AD would require revising the
existing inspection program to incorporate a reduced 600-hour
inspection interval for the redesigned part. Accomplishing the required
actions in this proposed AD would terminate the requirements of
paragraph (c) of AD 2001-03-05.

Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued the NPRM, the FAA determined that the list of
affected serial numbers specified in paragraph (c) of the proposed AD
was incomplete. The FAA has determined that this proposed AD should
apply to airplanes with an original airworthiness certificate or
original export certificate of airworthiness issued on or before
January 18, 2022. Airplanes with an original airworthiness certificate
or original export certificate of airworthiness issued after January
18, 2022 must comply with the airworthiness limitations specified as
part of the approved type design and referenced on the type certificate
data sheet; this proposed AD therefore does not include those airplanes
in the applicability.

Comments

    The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is proposing this AD after determining the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of
the same type design. Certain changes described above expand the scope
of the NPRM. As a result, it is necessary to reopen the comment period
to provide additional opportunity for the public to comment on this
SNPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Learjet 40 Maintenance Manual Temporary Revision
(TR) 04-33 and Learjet 45 Maintenance Manual TR 04-48, both dated
January 18, 2022. This service information specifies reduced inspection
intervals for the anti-ice manifold assembly. These documents are
distinct since they apply to different airplane configurations. This
service information is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in ADDRESSES.

Proposed AD Requirements in This SNPRM

    This proposed AD would require revising the existing inspection
program to incorporate reduced inspection intervals for the anti-ice
manifold assembly.
    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections).
Compliance with these actions is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For
airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in
the areas addressed by this proposed AD, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the actions 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 according to paragraph
(k) of this proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 481 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following
costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection program revision...........  1 work-hour x $85 per                 $0             $85         $40,885
                                         hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    The FAA is 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

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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 adding the following new airworthiness
directive:

Learjet, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2022-0991; Project Identifier AD-2022-
00155-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by December 27, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD affects AD 2001-03-05, Amendment 39-12109 (66 FR 10353,
February 15, 2001) (AD 2001-03-05).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Learjet, Inc., Model 45 (Learjet 40), Model
45 (Learjet 45), Model 45 (Learjet 70), and Model 45 (Learjet 75)
airplanes, certificated in any category, with an original
airworthiness certificate or original export certificate of
airworthiness issued on or before January 18, 2022.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 36, Pneumatic.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address metal fragments breaking off the anti-ice
manifold assembly due to fatigue, which could block a duct in the
anti-ice system and result in an unannunciated loss of ice
protection and subsequent loss of control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Maintenance or Inspection Program Revision

    (1) For Learjet 40 and 45 variants: Within 60 days after the
effective date of this AD, revise the existing inspection program by
incorporating the information in Learjet 40 Maintenance Manual
Temporary Revision (TR) 04-33 or Learjet 45 Maintenance Manual TR
04-48, both dated January 18, 2022, as applicable. The initial
compliance time for the inspection is at the applicable time
specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i) or (ii) of this AD.
    (i) For airplanes with more than 600 flight hours since the most
recent inspection of the anti-ice manifold assembly was performed as
of the effective date of this AD: Do the inspection within 100
flight hours or 60 days after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first.
    (ii) For airplanes with 600 flight hours or less since the most
recent inspection of the anti-ice manifold assembly was performed as
of the effective date of this AD: Do the inspection within 600
flight hours after the most recent inspection or within 100 flight
hours after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (2) For Learjet 70 and 75 variants: Within 60 days after the
effective date of this AD, revise the existing inspection program to
incorporate the information identified in figure 1 to paragraph
(g)(2) of this AD. The initial compliance time for the inspection is
at the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(2)(i) or (ii) of
this AD.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10NO22.000

    (i) For airplanes with more than 600 flight hours since the most
recent inspection of the anti-ice manifold assembly was performed as
of the effective date of this AD: Do the inspection within 100
flight hours or 60 days after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs first.
    (ii) For airplanes with 600 flight hours or less since the most
recent inspection of the anti-ice manifold assembly was performed as
of the effective date of this AD: Do the inspection within 600
flight hours after the most recent inspection or within 100 flight
hours after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.

(h) No Alternative Actions or Intervals

    After the existing inspection program has been revised as
required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative actions (e.g.,
inspections) or intervals, may be used unless the actions and
intervals are approved as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC)
in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (k) of this
AD.

(i) Terminating Action for Paragraph (c) of AD 2001-03-05

    Accomplishing the revision of the existing inspection program
required by paragraph (g) of this AD terminates the requirements of
paragraph (c) of AD 2001-03-05.

(j) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 14 CFR
21.197 and 21.199 to operate the airplane to a location where the
airplane can be inspected, provided the airplane is restricted from
flying into known icing conditions.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Wichita ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office,
as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of
the certification office, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (l) of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the responsible Flight Standards Office.

(l) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Adam Hein, Aerospace
Engineer, Mechanical Systems and Propulsion Section, FAA, Wichita
ACO Branch, 1801 S Airport Road, Wichita, KS 67209; telephone (316)
946-4116; email: [email protected].

(m) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Learjet 40 Maintenance Manual Temporary Revision 04-33,
dated January 18, 2022.
    (ii) Learjet 45 Maintenance Manual Temporary Revision 04-48,
dated January 18, 2022.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Learjet, Inc., One Learjet Way, Wichita, KS 67209-2942; telephone
316-946-2000; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email bombardier.com">[email protected]bombardier.com;
website bombardier.com.

    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on November 1, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-24419 Filed 11-9-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 189 (Friday, September 28, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59610-59611]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23981]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0985; FRL-9358-5]

Flonicamid; Applications To Add New Food Uses on Previously
Registered Pesticide Products

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of receipt.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the receipt of applications to add new
food uses on previously registered pesticide products containing the
insecticide, flonicamide, pursuant to the provisions of section 3(c) of
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as
amended. EPA is publishing this notice pursuant to section 3(c)(4) of
FIFRA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 29, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0985, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), Mail Code: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.htm.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carmen Rodia, Registration Division
(7504P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number (EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0985)
and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register
date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the
Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other
factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human
health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. Registration Applications

    EPA received four applications for the addition of new food uses on
previously registered pesticide products containing the insecticide,
flonicamid, N-(cyanomethyl)-4-(trifluoromethyl)-3-pyridinecarboxamide,
(Decisions No. 457721; 457723; 457724; and 457725), pursuant to the
provisions of section 3(c) of FIFRA, and is publishing this notice of
receipt of these applications pursuant to section 3(c)(4) of FIFRA.
Notice of receipt of these applications does not imply a decision by
the Agency on these applications. For actions being evaluated under the
Agency's public participation process for registration actions, there
will be an additional opportunity for a 30-day public comment period on
the proposed decision, risk assessments, and draft label. Please see
the Agency's public participation Web site for additional information
on this process http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/regulating/registration-public-involvement.html.
    1. Registration Number: 71512-7. Docket Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-
0985. Company name and address: ISK Bioscience Corporation, 7470 Auburn

Road, Suite A, Concord, OH 44077. Active ingredient: Flonicamid.
Product Name: Technical Flonicamid Insecticide. Proposed Use(s): Berry,
low-growing (subgroup 13-07G); Cucumber (for greenhouse use); and
Rapeseed (subgroup 20A).
    2. Registration Number: 71512-9. Docket Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-
0985. Company name and address: ISK Bioscience Corporation, 7470 Auburn
Road, Suite A, Concord, OH 44077. Active ingredient: Flonicamid.
Product Name: Flonicamid 50WG. Proposed Use(s): Berry, low-growing
(subgroup 13-07G); Cucumber (for greenhouse use); and Rapeseed
(subgroup 20A).
    3. Registration Number: 71512-10. Docket Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-
0985. Company name and address: ISK Bioscience Corporation, 7470 Auburn
Road, Suite A, Concord, OH 44077. Active ingredient: Flonicamid.
Product Name: Beleaf 50SG Insecticide. Proposed Use(s): Berry, low-
growing (subgroup 13-07G); Cucumber (for greenhouse use); and Rapeseed
(subgroup 20A).
    4. Registration Number: 71512-14. Docket Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-
0985. Company name and address ISK Bioscience Corporation, 7470 Auburn
Road, Suite A, Concord, OH 44077. Active ingredient: Flonicamid.
Product Name: Flonicamid 50WG for Manufacturing and Repacking Use Only.
Proposed Use(s): Berry, low-growing (subgroup 13-07G); Cucumber (for
greenhouse use); and Rapeseed (subgroup 20A).

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: September 21, 2012.
Daniel J. Rosenblatt,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2012-23981 Filed 9-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 12, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45204-45205]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16413]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. 2016-50]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; (Southwest
Airlines Company)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Title 14 of the Code of Federal
Regulations. The purpose of this notice is to improve the public's
awareness of, and participation in, the FAA's exemption process.
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 August 1, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number (FAA-2002-11485)
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations 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.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations 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: For technical questions concerning
this action, contact Nia Daniels, 800 Independence Ave. SW.,
Washington, DC 20591,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 29, 2016.
Dale Bouffiou,
Deputy Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2002-11485.
    Petitioner: Southwest Airlines Company.
    Section of 14 CFR Affected: 121.434(c)(1)(ii).
    Description of Relief Sought: Southwest Airlines Company
(Southwest) requests an amendment to Exemption No. 7132 which permits
Southwest to substitute a qualified and authorized check airman in
place of an FAA inspector to observe a qualifying pilot in command
(PIC) during at least one flight leg that includes a takeoff and a
landing while that PIC is completing the initial or upgrade training.
Southwest seeks an amendment to delete Condition and Limitation No.
1.b. of the exemption to remove the requirement that the qualifying PIC
candidate has completed no less than 10

hours of supervised operating experience and no fewer than two
landings.

[FR Doc. 2016-16413 Filed 7-11-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 227 (Friday, November 25, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 85157-85160]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28405]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 110

[Docket Number USCG-2016-0110]
RIN 1625-AA01

Anchorage Grounds; Delaware Bay and River, Philadelphia, PA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is revising the anchorage regulations for the
Delaware Bay and River. The Coast Guard conducted a review of the
Delaware Bay and River anchorage grounds to support increased traffic
and vessel size. The changes to this regulation will eliminate unusable
anchorage grounds and provide additional usable grounds to support
current and future port demands and enhance the overall navigation
safety of this critical component of the maritime transportation
system.

DATES: This rule is effective December 27, 2016.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2016-0110 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Commander Tiffany Johnson, U.S. Coast Guard,
Fifth Coast Guard District, Waterways Management Branch, telephone
(757) 398-6516, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
COTP Captain of the Port

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On July 15, 2016, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) titled Anchorage Grounds; Delaware Bay and River,
Philadelphia, PA (81 FR 46026). There we stated why we issued the NPRM,
and invited comments on our proposed regulatory action related to these
anchorage regulations for Delaware Bay and River. During the comment
period that ended August 15, 2016, we received two comments.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The purpose of this rule is to eliminate unusable anchorage
grounds and maximize usable anchorage grounds within the anchorage
boundaries while continuing to safely support current and future port
demands.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, we received two comments on our NPRM published July
15, 2016. One comment was in favor of the proposed changes. The second
comment requested that the Coast Guard define the boundaries of the
anchorages using coordinates instead of bearings and distances. As a
result, the regulatory text of this rule has been changed to use
coordinates to define the anchorages covered by this rule, with the
exception of the western boundary of Anchorage 12 between Gloucester
and Camden, 33 CFR 110.157(a)(13), for which it is impracticable to
define using coordinates.
    This rule makes changes to seven of the Delaware Bay and River
anchorages in order to eliminate unusable anchorage grounds and
maximize usable anchorage grounds within the anchorage boundaries while
continuing to safely support current and future port demands.
    The Delaware Bay and River anchorage grounds are largely used by
commercial vessel traffic. General regulations covering the anchorage
of vessels in the port are set out in 33 CFR 110.157. In 1992, the
Delaware River Main Channel Deepening project was authorized for
construction by Public Law 102-580, Section 101 (6) of the Water
Resources Development Act (WRDA) 1992; modified by Public Law 106-53,
Section 308 of WRDA 1999 and further modified by Public Law 106-541,
Section 306 of WRDA 2000. This project includes deepening the existing
Delaware River Federal Navigation Channel from 40 to 45 feet from
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Camden, New Jersey to the mouth of the
Delaware Bay. The Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) along with the non-
Federal sponsor, the Philadelphia Regional Port Authority (PRPA),
commenced dredging for this project in 2010. This project, once
completed, will allow for deeper draft vessels within the port and
increase overall traffic, and anchorage usage. Due to this anticipated
increase in marine traffic a review of the current Delaware Bay and
River anchorage grounds was conducted by the Waterways Management
Division Sector Delaware Bay, Philadelphia, PA. Upon review, it was
determined that multiple anchorage grounds in 33 CFR 110.157 were
unusable for some larger vessels due to lack of depth needed to safely
anchor. Other anchorage grounds were deemed unusable because they
spanned underneath bridges where it would be impractical for vessels to
anchor, and posed an increased and unnecessary safety risk of bridge
allision.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
    This rule is not a significant regulatory action because it will
not interfere with existing maritime activity on the Delaware River.
Rather, it will enhance navigational safety along the Delaware River by
providing safer locations for vessels to anchor, improving navigation
safety near bridges and reducing the potential for disruption to
maritime traffic by anchored vessels potentially within the federal
channel. Vessels may navigate in, around, and through the modified
anchorages.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    The rule may affect owners and operators of vessels wishing to
anchor in the Delaware Bay and River anchorages. Boundaries of some of
the current anchorages have been modified, reduced, or increased
depending on the water depth and relation of the anchorage to bridges
along the Delaware Bay and River. The impact of the rule will be
minimal because the changes increase usable anchorage grounds and
enable vessels to safely anchor in the anchorage boundaries.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule will affect your small
business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain

about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule involves establishing, disestablishing, and modifying anchorage
grounds. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph 34(f) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a
Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110

    Anchorage grounds.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 110 as follows:

PART 110--ANCHORAGE REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 110 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 1236, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05-
1; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Amend Sec.  110.157 by revising paragraphs (a)(2), (4), (7), (9),
and (12) through (14) to read as follows:

Sec.  110.157   Delaware Bay and River.

    (a) * * *
    (2) Anchorage 1 off Bombay Hook Point. On the southwest side of the
channel along Liston Range, in the waters bounded by a line connecting
the following points:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Latitude                             Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
39[deg]17'14.0'' N                    075[deg]22'21.0'' W
39[deg]16'55.2'' N                    075[deg]22'50.5'' W
39[deg]20'34.1'' N                    075[deg]26'56.8'' W
39[deg]20'53.5'' N                    075[deg]26'28.0'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(DATUM: NAD 83)
* * * * *
    (4) Anchorage 3 southeast of Reedy Point. Southeast of the entrance
to the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal at Reedy Point, in the waters
bounded by a line connecting the following points:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Latitude                             Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
39[deg]33'09.0'' N                    075[deg]32'38.0'' W
39[deg]32'34.6'' N                    075[deg]32'38.2'' W
39[deg]31'29.0'' N                    075[deg]33'01.0'' W
39[deg]31'31.8'' N                    075[deg]33'16.2'' W
39[deg]32'14.6'' N                    075[deg]33'08.3'' W
39[deg]33'09.0'' N                    075[deg]33'10.0'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(DATUM: NAD 83)
* * * * *
    (7) Anchorage 6 off Deepwater Point. East of the entrance to
Christina River, in the waters bounded by a line connecting the
following points:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Latitude                             Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
39[deg]43'00.0'' N                    075[deg]30'20.0'' W
39[deg]42'51.5 '' N                   075[deg]29'44.9'' W
39[deg]42'05.4'' N                    075[deg]30'25.2'' W
39[deg]41'47.3'' N                    075[deg]30'37.5'' W
39[deg]41'34.7'' N                    075[deg]30'39.9'' W
39[deg]41'36.6'' N                    075[deg]30'51.1'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(DATUM: NAD 83)
* * * * *
    (9) Anchorage 8 off Thompson Point. On the south side of the
channel along Tinicum Range, between Thompson Point and the east side
of Crab Point, in the waters bounded by a line connecting the following
points:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Latitude                             Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
39[deg]50'52.0'' N                    075[deg]18'23.0'' W
39[deg]50'51.1'' N                    075[deg]17'41.0'' W
39[deg]50'44.5'' N                    075[deg]17'41.6'' W
39[deg]50'46.0'' N                    075[deg]18'23.0'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(DATUM: NAD 83)
* * * * *
    (12) Anchorage 11 at Gloucester. (i) East of the channel south of
the Walt Whitman Bridge at Gloucester, in the waters bounded by a line
connecting the following points:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Latitude                             Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
39[deg]54'10.0'' N                    075[deg]07'45.0'' W
39[deg]54'09.4'' N                    075[deg]07'43.0'' W
39[deg]54'03.0'' N                    075[deg]07'41.0'' W
39[deg]53'30.5'' N                    075[deg]07'57.7'' W
39[deg]53'09.6'' N                    075[deg]08'17.0'' W
39[deg]53'36.6'' N                    075[deg]08'00.6'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(DATUM: NAD 83)
    (ii) The area between Pier 124 S and 122 S, along the west side of
the Delaware River, is restricted to facilitate vessel movements. The
areas adjacent to working piers are restricted to facilitate the
movement of vessels to and from these piers. Should the anchorage
become so congested that vessels are compelled to anchor in these
restricted areas, they must move immediately when another berth is
available.
    (13) Anchorage 12 between Gloucester and Camden. (i) East of the
channel beginning north of the Walt Whitman Bridge at Gloucester and
ending south of the Benjamin Franklin Bridge at Camden, bounded as
follows: Beginning at a point at latitude 39[deg]54'26.0'' N, longitude
75[deg]07'41'' W, bounded on the west by a line perpendicular to the
channel, 210 yards from the east edge of the channel, 5,536 yards north
to a point at latitude 39[deg]57'05.0'' N, longitude 75[deg]08'04.2''
W, and then bounded by a line connecting the following points,
connecting to the point of beginning:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Latitude                             Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
39[deg]57'04.3'' N                    075[deg]07'57.3'' W
39[deg]56'51.7'' N                    075[deg]08'01.3'' W
39[deg]56'35.5'' N                    075[deg]08'03.1'' W
39[deg]56'02.8'' N                    075[deg]08'02.0'' W
39[deg]55'34.7'' N                    075[deg]07'54.5'' W
39[deg]54'45.7'' N                    075[deg]07'32.5'' W
39[deg]54'33.8'' N                    075[deg]07'32.9'' W
39[deg]54'25.2'' N                    075[deg]07'36.1'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(DATUM: NAD 83)
    (ii) The area between No. 2 Broadway pier and No. 1 Broadway pier
is restricted to facilitate vessel movements. The areas adjacent to
working piers are restricted to facilitate the movement of vessels to
and from these piers. Should the anchorage become so congested that
vessels are compelled to anchor in these restricted areas, they must
move immediately when another berth is available.
    (14) Anchorage 13 at Camden. East of the channel, north of the
Benjamin Franklin Bridge to Cooper Point, Camden, NJ, in the waters
bounded by a line connecting the following points:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Latitude                             Longitude
------------------------------------------------------------------------
39[deg]57'17.0'' N                    075[deg]07'58.0'' W
39[deg]57'22.3'' N                    075[deg]07'55.9'' W
39[deg]57'32.0'' N                    075[deg]07'49.4'' W
39[deg]57'39.2'' N                    075[deg]07'39.7'' W
39[deg]57'34.9'' N                    075[deg]07'34.7'' W
39[deg]57'21.2'' N                    075[deg]07'49.8'' W
39[deg]57'15.1'' N                    075[deg]07'52.7'' W
------------------------------------------------------------------------

(DATUM: NAD 83)
* * * * *

    Dated: November 7, 2016.
Meredith L. Austin,
Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2016-28405 Filed 11-23-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


                 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                                   REGION 5
                           77 WEST JACKSON BOULEVARD
                            CHICAGO, IL 60604-3590

STATEMENT OF BASIS FOR ISSUANCE OF A CLASS VI UNDERGROUND INJECTION CONTROL (UIC) PERMIT

                                             Permit Number:	 IL-115-6A-0001

                                             Facility Name:	CCS#2

Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) of Decatur, Illinois applied for a U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Underground Injection Control (UIC) injection well permit to be used for geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide (CO2) as a Class VI well (CCS#2). ADM is capturing CO2 at its agricultural and biofuels facility generated from a fuel ethanol production unit which, when injected underground, will support the goal of reducing carbon emissions to the atmosphere to help mitigate climate change.

ADM has planned for two injection wells at this project location. The first well, CCS#1, is currently operating with an injection well permit from the Illinois EPA. It will receive 1 million metric tons of CO2 over three years (2011-2014) and prior to injection at CCS#2.

EPA reviewed all information submitted by ADM to inform the draft permit decision on CCS#2. EPA considered information and issues including:
   *       Geologic site characterization, injection and confining zone characterization, and project siting;
   *       Computational modeling of the project's Area of Review (AoR);
   *       The proposed well construction and operational conditions;
   *       The approach ADM proposed to monitor the well and track the plume and pressure front to ensure protection of underground sources of drinking water (USDW) for the life of the project - including both the injection and post-injection site care periods;
   *       ADM's financial responsibility demonstration;
   *       The strategy to address and mitigate risks associated with induced seismicity;
   *       The proposed alternative post-injection site care timeframe;
   *       Emergency and remedial response strategy development;
   *       The CO2 stream source, characteristics and purity;
   *       Environmental justice;
   *       Endangered species; and
   * Ensuring USDW protection.

EPA's review of the permit application indicates that the proposed injection project meets the requirements for Class VI injection wells and will not pose a risk of endangerment to USDWs. The EPA, therefore, is issuing a draft permit decision for this well. Under the authority of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR) Parts 144 and 146, EPA Class VI permits must specify conditions for the construction, operation, monitoring, reporting, plugging, post-injection site care and site closure of Class VI injection wells so as to prevent the movement of fluids into any USDW or unauthorized zones. General provisions for EPA UIC permit requirements are found at 40 CFR Parts 124, 144, 146 and 147. In accordance with 40 CFR 124.7, general information and highlighted permit conditions specific to this well are discussed in the following sections.

Area of Review (AoR) and Corrective Action: In accordance with 40 CFR 144.55, 146.6, 146.7 and 146.84, the AoR is the region surrounding the geologic sequestration project where any improperly sealed, completed or abandoned wells that penetrate the injection and/or confining zones could provide a conduit for fluid migration. ADM delineated an AoR of approximately 12.6 square miles, as shown in the map below.

Figure 1. The ADM project proposed AoR including: the modeled CO2 plume (in blue) and the predicted area of elevated pressure (outlined in green).

This area was delineated pursuant to 40 CFR 146.84(c)(1) using a computational model that predicts the movement of the carbon dioxide plume and pressure front based on available information about planned injection operations and the subsurface rock formations. EPA performed an extensive evaluation of the AoR proposed by ADM by independently modeling the AoR using the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP) multi-phase transport model, based on the site-specific geologic and operational data in the permit application and determined that the AoR delineated by ADM is sufficiently extensive and meets the requirements of 40 CFR 146.84(c)(1). EPA also evaluated the modeling approach used by the permittee and determined that it meets the requirements for computational models to delineate Class VI AoRs. Information about EPA's independent assessment is available in a report in the Administrative Record for this permit decision.

In accordance with 40 CFR 144.55 and 146.84, ADM must perform corrective action to address any deficiencies identified in wells in the AoR, as described in the Area of Review and Corrective Action Plan attached to the permit. Based on an evaluation of well records, ADM has determined that there are two active wells (an injection well and a monitoring well for the nearby CCS#1 site) and no temporarily abandoned or plugged and abandoned wells within the AoR that penetrate the injection zone. EPA confirmed ADM's assessment of wells in the AoR by reviewing water well databases from the Illinois State Geological Survey and the Illinois State Water Survey, and confirmed that no wells in the AoR penetrate the confining zone and thus no wells require corrective action.

As required at 40 CFR 146.84(e), ADM will reevaluate the AoR using computational modeling at least every five years over the lifetime of the project to verify, based on monitoring and operating data, that the carbon dioxide plume and pressure front are moving as predicted. ADM will also review monitoring data annually to determine whether additional reevaluations of the AoR are needed. This AoR reevaluation, and any additional corrective action that is needed, will be performed pursuant to the Area of Review and Corrective Action Plan, which is an enforceable condition of the Class VI permit. If this reevaluation indicates that there are changes from predictions, ADM must revise all of the project-specific plans and the permit will be modified per 40 CFR 144.39.

Underground Sources of Drinking Water (USDWs): A USDW is defined by the UIC regulations as an aquifer or portion of an aquifer that supplies any public water system or that contains a sufficient quantity of ground water to supply a public water system, and currently supplies drinking water for human consumption, or that contains fewer than 10,000 mg/L total dissolved solids and is not an exempted aquifer. The base of the St. Peter Formation, the lowermost USDW in the vicinity of the injection well, has been identified at approximately 2,604 feet below the ground surface, based on potentiometric data collected from four ground water monitoring wells at the site. The shallow, Quaternary- and Pennsylvanian-age aquifers that serve as the source of local drinking water are approximately 140 feet below the ground surface.

Injection and Confining Zone: Injection for geologic sequestration is limited by the permit to the Mt. Simon Sandstone in the interval between 5,545 and 7,051 feet below the ground surface. This injection zone is separated from the lowermost USDW by approximately 2,000 feet of rock, including an impermeable confining zone, the Eau Claire Formation, which will act as barrier to fluid movement. Figure 2 shows the depth of the injection and confining zones.

EPA has reviewed extensive information submitted by ADM, including maps, well logs, cores, and the results of seismic surveys. Based on this information, EPA has determined that the regional and local geologic features at the site will allow the Mt. Simon Sandstone to receive the amount of carbon dioxide proposed to be injected without an excessive buildup of pressure that would create faults or fractures. EPA also determined that the site is free of any known faults or fractures that could affect containment and that the Eau Claire Formation will provide suitable containment to ensure that the carbon dioxide remains in place and USDWs will not be endangered, as required under 40 CFR 146.83. EPA also evaluated information on seismic history in the area and seismic risk to conclude that the project poses a low risk of inducing felt seismic events. Information on this evaluation is available in a separate document in the Administrative Record for these permit decisions.

Construction Requirements: The proposed construction of the injection well meets the regulatory criteria of 40 CFR 146.86. All Class VI wells must be constructed with carbon dioxide-compatible materials and cements that can withstand exposure to carbon dioxide and carbon dioxide/water mixtures without excessive corrosion over the life of the project (see Figure 2 for a construction schematic). This well will be equipped with an automatic surface shut-off device that will shut off the well if any permitted operating parameters (such as injection pressure) diverge from limitations set in the permit. EPA reviewed the proposed well schematics submitted with the permit application to verify that the cements and other materials proposed for the well will be compatible with the carbon dioxide stream and planned operations (e.g., injection pressures). Following well construction, pursuant to 40 CFR 146.82(c), EPA will review any final "as built" well schematics to confirm that the well was constructed to ensure USDW protection, meet the goals of the Class VI Rule at 40 CFR 146.86(a) and that it is equipped with the required shut-down devices before injection is authorized.

Injection Fluid: The permit limits the fluid that may be injected to the carbon dioxide stream generated from ADM's fuel ethanol production unit and is proposed to be 99.9 percent CO2. The expected maximum daily amount of carbon dioxide to be injected is 3,000 megatons. ADM anticipates injecting a total of 5.5 million tons of carbon dioxide over five years in the CCS#2 well. EPA evaluated historical information about the carbon dioxide generated by the ethanol plant provided by ADM and determined that the carbon dioxide generated is very pure and contains no hazardous constituents.

Maximum Injection Pressure: The maximum injection pressure will be limited to 2,380 pounds per square inch gauge (psig) measured at the surface. This pressure is 90 percent of the fracture pressure of the Mt. Simon Sandstone, which was calculated based on the results of formation testing performed at the CCS#1 well near the proposed site. This limitation will ensure that the pressure during injection does not initiate fractures in the injection or confining zones, pursuant to 40 CFR 146.88(a). This, in turn, ensures that the injection pressure will not cause the movement of injection or formation fluids into a USDW as prohibited by 40 CFR 146.86(a). EPA confirmed, based on geomechanical information about the injection and confining zones (e.g., fracture pressure, porosity, and permeability), that the injection pressure is appropriate and will not initiate fractures in the injection or confining zones.

Figure 2. Injection Well Schematic

Monitoring and Reporting Requirements: In accordance with 40 CFR 146.90, ADM will implement an approved Testing and Monitoring Plan for the project. The multi-faceted Testing and Monitoring Plan, which is an enforceable condition of the Class VI permit, includes the following testing that ADM will undertake to ensure USDW protection:
   * Analyzing the carbon dioxide quarterly: to provide information about its chemical and physical characteristics.
   * Testing of the injection well: to demonstrate the integrity of the well before injection commences and throughout injection operations. ADM must conduct and pass a two-part mechanical integrity test (MIT), in accordance with 40 CFR 146.8 and 146.89, before receiving authorization to inject. After injection commences, ADM will continuously observe and record injection pressure, flow rate and volume and the pressure on the annulus to detect leaks in the casing, tubing or packer. In addition, ADM must demonstrate external mechanical integrity annually using a temperature or noise log or another method approved by the Director to detect fluid movement behind the casing. ADM will also test the well materials for signs of corrosion on a quarterly basis to provide early warning of corrosion due to contact with carbon dioxide in the presence of water that could compromise the well.
   * Monitoring the environment near the well: to verify that the project and the injected carbon dioxide plume and pressure front are behaving as predicted. (See the section entitled "Area of Review and Corrective Action" for details on the delineation of this area and Figure 1). ADM will:
         o Perform groundwater quality monitoring in shallow wells quarterly in the first years of the project and every 6 months later in the project, and monitor ground water quality in deeper wells annually to detect geochemical changes that may be a result of changes in the subsurface (such as leaching or mobilization of heavy metals and organic compounds or fluid displacement) that could impact USDWs.
         o Conduct Pressure fall-off testing half-way through the injection period and at the end of injection to verify that the injection zone is responding (to injection) as predicted.
         o Track the movement of the carbon dioxide plume and pressure front using direct methods (e.g., fluid sampling and pressure/temperature monitoring) and indirect methods (e.g., pulsed neutron capture/reservoir saturation logs and 3D seismic surveys) to verify that the carbon dioxide plume and pressure front are moving as predicted or provide early warning if they are not.
   * Monitoring for natural or induced seismic events: to verify that the project is operating as predicted and the geologic system and injection wells are not compromised by any felt or unfelt microseismic events, whether natural or induced.

In accordance with 40 CFR 144.54 and 146.91, ADM will submit the results of this monitoring to the permitting authority semiannually or within 30 days of the completion of an MIT or other required testing.

EPA evaluated ADM's proposed Testing and Monitoring Plan to ensure that all testing procedures are appropriate to the planned operations, the well's construction, and the geologic environment and that this testing and monitoring meets the requirements of the Class VI Rule at 40 CFR 146.90. The proposed well testing is appropriate to the planned well construction and will provide early warning of any problems that may occur. EPA also determined, based on information regarding the anticipated movement of the carbon dioxide plume and pressure front, that the locations and methods for monitoring ground water quality and the position of the plume and pressure front will provide the information needed to provide early warning of ground water quality changes or carbon dioxide leakage. EPA considered modeling data, hydrogeologic information on the properties of the injection and confining zone, and the need to limit the number of penetrations of the confining zone in determining the appropriate direct and indirect ground water and carbon dioxide monitoring regime.

Emergency and Remedial Response: In accordance with 40 CFR 146.94, ADM developed a site-specific Emergency and Remedial Response Plan that identifies the resources that may be at risk due to the injection activities, including USDWs; drinking water wells; the Sangamon River; Bois Du Sangamon Nature Preserve; and Lake Decatur; and infrastructure, including the wellhead, structures at Richland Community College, and the ADM facilities. The Plan, which is an enforceable part of the permit, also describes the responses that would be taken to address adverse events, and the staff and equipment available to support this and other such activities. The Emergency and Remedial Response provisions of the permit will facilitate expedient responses and prevent or mitigate harm to the environment, including USDWs. EPA evaluated the Emergency and Remedial Response Plan to verify that sufficient, specific procedures are in place should an adverse event (including a well failure, leakage of carbon dioxide, or a seismic event) that impacts any identified resource in the AoR arise, so that ADM can expeditiously take effective actions to prevent or mitigate harm to USDWs.

Financial Responsibility: In accordance with 40 CFR 146.85, ADM has demonstrated and will maintain adequate financial resources to perform all needed corrective action on wells in the AoR, to plug the injection well, to perform all required post-injection site care activities and close the site, and to conduct any emergency and remedial response needed to address adverse events at the site. This financial responsibility ensures that resources are available to perform all USDW-protective activities without using public/taxpayer money. ADM estimated the costs necessary to cover the activities described above and provided financial statements and bond ratings to demonstrate that it has the necessary resources to cover these costs. ADM will update the cost estimates on an annual basis and, if necessary, adjust the financial responsibility demonstration to address any changes, e.g., based on inflation or changes to the project that affect these costs.

EPA determined that the amount of funds ADM has set aside is adequate by comparing cost estimates provided by ADM for the covered activities to estimates EPA independently generated using its Cost Estimation Tool, which estimates financial responsibility costs based on site-specific information (e.g., about well depth, the presence of USDWs in the AoR, and the volume of carbon dioxide to be injected). EPA also evaluated the financial responsibility instruments using checklists developed by the UIC Program that evaluate the strength of available instruments. Information on EPA's cost estimation analysis is documented in a report that is available in the Administrative Record for this permit decision.

Well Plugging: In accordance with 40 CFR 146.92, the permit includes a Well Plugging Plan for environmentally protective plugging of the injection well to ensure that the well will be plugged in a manner that will not allow movement of injected or native fluids into USDWs. The well will be plugged using approved materials that are compatible with carbon dioxide/water mixtures to ensure that it will not serve as a conduit for fluid movement. EPA evaluated ADM proposed Injection Well Plugging Plan to verify that the well will be plugged with sufficient numbers and types of plugs and cement, based on the proposed depth and design of the well and geologic information, to ensure that after it is plugged, the well will not serve as a conduit for fluid movement. EPA will review the plugging plan after ADM submits the final "as built" well schematics following construction of the well to confirm that the plugging plan is appropriate. The Injection Well Plugging plan is an enforceable condition of the Class VI permit.

Post-Injection Site Care (PISC) and Site Closure: In accordance with 40 CFR 146.93, the permittee must implement an approved Post-Injection Site Care and Site Closure Plan, which is an enforceable condition of the Class VI permit. Following the cessation of injection, ADM must continue to monitor ground water quality and track the movement of the carbon dioxide plume and pressure front in a manner similar to that described under "Monitoring and Reporting Requirements" above. This monitoring will help confirm predictions about the behavior of the carbon dioxide plume and pressure front (i.e., that pressures will subside after injection ceases), provide early warning of any USDW endangerment, and eventually inform a non-endangerment demonstration (i.e., that the site no longer poses a risk of endangerment to USDWs and no further monitoring or site care are needed). EPA evaluated the proposed post-injection monitoring along with its review of the injection-phase ground water and carbon dioxide plume and pressure front monitoring, as described under "Monitoring and Reporting Requirements," above.

ADM will continue this post-injection monitoring for at least ten (10) years and until they can demonstrate that the site does not pose a risk of endangerment to USDWs and that site closure may be authorized. This timeframe differs from the 50-year default in the Class VI Rule, and is allowable if a permittee can demonstrate, based on significant, site-specific data and information about the site and the proposed operation that the project will no longer pose a risk of endangerment to USDWs at the end of this alternative post-injection site care timeframe. In approving ADM's alternative PISC timeframe, EPA considered information on the predicted movement of the carbon dioxide plume and pressure front, as informed by the AoR delineation modeling; predictions of plume migration, pressure decline, and carbon dioxide trapping; site-specific geology; well construction; and the distance between the injection zone and the nearest USDWs.

Post-injection monitoring must continue until ADM can successfully demonstrate that the site does not pose a risk to USDWs, based on site-specific information that is descried in the Post-Injection Site Care and Site Closure Plan. This non-endangerment demonstration will be based on a comparison of monitoring data to model predictions and an evaluation of the carbon dioxide plume, mobilized fluids, reservoir pressure, and potential conduits for fluid movement.

Following authorization of site closure, ADM will plug all monitoring wells with carbon dioxide-compatible materials to ensure that they cannot serve as conduits for fluid movement and will restore the site to its original condition (by removing all equipment and planting vegetation).

Issuance and Effective Date of Permit: In accordance with 40 CFR 124.15, the permit will become effective immediately upon final issuance if no public comments are received during the public comment period that request a change in the draft permit. However, in the event that public comments are received that request a change in the draft permit, then the permit will become effective 45 days after the date of issuance unless the permit is appealed. In accordance with 40 CFR 144.36(a), the permit will be in effect for the life of the project, unless it is otherwise modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated as provided at 40 CFR 144.39, 144.40 and 144.41. The permit will expire in one (1) year if ADM fails to commence construction, unless a written request for an extension of this one (1) year period has been approved by the Director. Authorization to inject under this permit will be granted following well construction and compliance with additional requirements as outlined in the permit and regulations at 40 CFR 146.82, 146.86, 146.87 and 146.89. If significant changes occur to the permit between this draft decision and the authorization to inject, there will be an additional opportunity for public comment pursuant to requirements at 40 CFR 144.39.

Opportunity for Public Input: Questions, comments and requests for additional information may be submitted in writing to Allan Batka at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>via the internet. The public comment period on this permitting action will close on May xx, 2014, 45 days after the date of the public notice. During the comment period, EPA will also conduct a public hearing on May xx, 2014 at [location, address] to facilitate submittal of verbal comments on this permit.

The administrative record index for this permit is available at www.epa.gov/region5/water/uic/adm/.  The full administrative record, including all data and information submitted by ADM in support of its permit application, is available for public review at EPA's Chicago regional office. The office is open 8:30 a.m. -  4:30 p.m., weekdays.

To preserve your right to appeal any final permit decision that may be made in this matter under 40 CFR Part 124, you must either participate in the public hearing or send in written comments on the draft permit decision. The first appeal must be made to the Environmental Appeals Board; only after all agency review procedures have been exhausted may you file an action in the appropriate Circuit Court of Appeals for review.


MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: 	Bounding Analysis for Portland Cement MACT Floors
TO:		Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0817
DATE:		May 14, 2012

EPA re-evaluated the floor calculations used in the final NESHAP for the Portland cement source category.  75 FR 54970 (Sept. 9, 2010).  This analysis is a bounding analysis which removes from the Portland cement database any cement kiln which combusts a non-hazardous secondary material. This analysis is not intended to determine which kilns are CISWI and which remain cement kilns.  Rather, it determines what floors would be on the extreme hypothetical assumption that any cement kiln which combusts a non-hazardous secondary material is not a cement kiln.  The analysis then determines what the floors would be under this extreme assumption, bounding the possible floors which could result from the data set.
The results of this analysis are presented below:
                                   Pollutant
          Kilns that do not combust non-hazardous secondary materials
                           Promulgated  -  All Kilns

                                   Existing
                                      New
                                   Existing
                                      New
Hg

No. of Kilns
                                                                             26
                                                                             26
                                                                             89
                                                                             89
No. in Floor
                                                                              4
                                                                              1
                                                                             11
                                                                              1
UPL (lb/MM tons clinker)
                                                                          66.60
                                                                          46.48
                                                                          54.10
                                                                          20.30
Average (lb/MM tons clinker)
                                                                          44.75
                                                                          35.20
                                                                          31.70
                                                                          13.90
HCl

No. of Kilns
                                                                             11
                                                                             11
                                                                             21
                                                                             21
No. in Floor
                                                                              2
                                                                              1
                                                                              3
                                                                              1
UPL (ppm)
                                                                           0.56
                                                                           0.34
                                                                           0.52
                                                                           0.34
Average (ppm)
                                                                           0.40
                                                                           0.34
                                                                           0.41
                                                                           0.34
PM

No. of Kilns
                                                                             18
                                                                             18
                                                                             45
                                                                             45
No. in Floor
                                                                              3
                                                                              1
                                                                              6
                                                                              1
UPL (lb/ton clinker)
                                                                           0.05
                                                                           0.01
                                                                           0.04
                                                                           0.01
Average (lb/ton clinker)
                                                                           0.03
                                                                           0.01
                                                                           0.00
                                                                           0.01
THC

No. of Kilns
                                                                             10
                                                                             10
                                                                             15
                                                                             15
No. in Floor
                                                                              2
                                                                              1
                                                                              2
                                                                              1
99[th] percentile (ppm)
                                                                          14.98
                                                                          10.84
                                                                          24.00
                                                                          24.00
Average (ppm)
                                                                           5.69
                                                                           5.68
                                                                           5.20
                                                                           4.70

The attachment to this memo (Attachment A) contains the calculations supporting these results.    Attachment A-9 details the kilns identified as CISWI at reconsideration.  These kilns were removed from all MACT floor calculations as part of the bounding analysis.  Additionally, any kilns identified as combusting non-hazardous secondary material from the 2007 portland cement ICR were removed from the MACT floor calculations.  Attachment A-10 details the kilns that were identified as combusting non-hazardous secondary materials.

	We note further that although the HCl floor ostensibly changes (slightly) in this analysis, in fact there is no reason that the HCl floor would change.  This is because the floor is effectively determined by the analytic detection limit, and there are a large group of cement kilns which performed identically to the best performers.  See 76 FR at 28322 n. 11.  The reason for the (slightly) different value in this bounding analysis is due to the different number of sources in the database, not to any difference in measured performance.  Since there is no actual difference in kiln performance for HCl, there is no reason that the floor should be altered.

	We also note that no cement kilns are reclassified as incinerators in this bounding analysis due to processing non-hazardous secondary materials as ingredients.  This is because none of the non-hazardous materials identified by cement kilns as being used as ingredients are combusted, as explained at 76 FR 28322.

	Even under the extreme assumptions of this analysis, EPA does not believe that the technology basis for the PM, HCl, THC or mercury standards would change were these bounding analysis floors to be adopted as standards.