OMB Control No. 2060-0586

 Home Address: 	City:  	 State:

                                           Inspection Guidelines
                                      Must
                                    Correct
  Rater
 Verified

  N/A
 1.  Review of HVAC System Quality Installation Contractor C
h
ecklist 2
    1.1   HVAC System Quality Installation Contractor checklist completed in its entirety and collected for records, along with documentation on ventilation system (1.3), full load calculations (2.18), AHRI certificate (3.15), and balancing report (10.2).

                                       

                                       

                                       
 1.2 Review the following parameters related to system cooling design, selection, and installation from the HVAC Contractor checklist
   (Contractor checklist item # indicated in parenthesis):
    1.2.1  Outdoor design temperatures (2.4) are equal to the 1% and 99% ACCA Manual J design temperatures for contractor-designated design location 3

                                       

                                       

                                       
    1.2.2 Home orientation (2.5) matches orientation of rated home
                                       
                                       
                                       
    1.2.3 Number of Occupants (2.6) equals number of occupants in rated home 4
                                       
                                       
                                       
    1.2.4 Conditioned floor area (2.7) is within +-10% of conditioned floor area of rated home
                                       
                                       
                                       
    1.2.5 Window area (2.8) is within +-10% of calculated window area of rated home
                                       
                                       
                                       
    1.2.6 Predominant window SHGC (2.9) is within 0.1 of predominant value in rated home 5
                                       
                                       
                                       
    1.2.7 Listed latent cooling capacity (3.10) exceeds design latent heat gain (2.12)
                                       
                                       
                                       
    1.2.8 Listed sensible cooling capacity (3.11) exceeds design sensible heat gain (2.13)
                                       
                                       
                                       
    1.2.9 Listed total cooling capacity (3.12) is 95-115% (or 95-125% for Heat Pumps in Climate
        Zones 4-8) of design total heat gain (2.14), or next nominal size 6

                                       

                                       

                                       
    1.2.10 HVAC manufacturer and model numbers on installed equipment, contractor checklist (3.1,
        3.3, 5.1), and AHRI certificate or OEM catalog data all match 7

                                       

                                       

                                       
        1.2.11 Using reported liquid line (6.3) or suction line (6.5) pressure, corresponding temp. (as determined using pressure/temperature chart for refrigerant type) matches reported condenser (7.1) or evaporator (7.5) saturation temperature (+/- 3 degrees) 8

                                       

                                       

                                       
        1.2.12 Calculated subcooling (7.1 minus 6.4) or superheat (6.6 minus 7.5) value equals reported target subcooling (7.3) or superheat (7.7) temperature 8

                                       

                                       

                                       
 1.3  Rater-verified supply & return duct static pressure <110% of contractor values (9.3, 9.4)
                                       
                                       
                                       
 2. Duct Quality Installation  - Applies to All Heating, Cooling, Ventilation, Exhaust, and Pressure Balancing Ducts
 2.1   Connections and routing of ductwork completed without kinks or sharp bends.9
                                       
                                       
                                       
 2.2   No excessive coiled or looped flexible ductwork.10
                                       
                                       
                                       
    2.3   Flexible ducts in unconditioned space not installed in cavities smaller than outer duct diameter; in conditioned space not installed in cavities smaller than inner duct diameter

                                       

                                       

                                       
 2.4   Flexible ducts supported at intervals as recommended by mfr. but at a distance < 5 ft.
                                       
                                       
                                       
    2.5   Building cavities not used as supply or return ducts unless they meet items 3.2, 3.3, 4.1, and 4.2 of this checklist.

                                       

                                       

                                       
    2.6   HVAC ducts, cavities used as ducts, and combustion inlets and outlets may pass perpendicularly through exterior walls but shall not be run within exterior walls unless at least R-6 continuous
    insulation is provided on exterior side of the cavity, along with an interior and exterior air barrier where required by the Thermal Enclosure System Rater Checklist.

                                       

                                       

                                       
 2.7   Quantity & location of supply and return duct terminals match contractor balancing report.
                                       
                                       
                                       
    2.8   Bedrooms pressure-balanced using any combination of transfer grills, jump ducts, dedicated return ducts, and/or undercut doors to either: a) provide 1 sq. in. of free area opening per 1 CFM of supply air, as reported on the contractor-provided balancing report; or b) achieve a Rater- measured pressure differential < 3 Pa (0.012 in. w.c.) with respect to the main body of the house
    when bedroom doors are closed and the air handler is operating.11

                                       

                                       

                                       
 3. Duct Insulation - Applies to All Heating, Cooling, Supply Ventilation, and Pressure Balancing Ducts 12
 3.1   All connections to trunk ducts in unconditioned space are insulated.
                                       
                                       
                                       
 3.2  Prescriptive Path: Supply ducts in unconditioned attic have insulation > R-8.
    Performance Path: Supply ducts in unconditioned attic have insulation > R-6.

                                       

                                       

                                       
 3.3   All other supply ducts and all return ducts in unconditioned space have insulation > R-6.
                                       
                                       
                                       
 4. Duct Leakage - Applies to All Heating, Cooling, and Balanced Ventilation Ducts
 4.1  Total Rater-measured duct leakage < 6 CFM25 per 100 sq. ft. of conditioned floor area13,14
                                       
                                       
                                       
 4.2   Rater -measured duct leakage to outdoors < 4 CFM25 per 100 sq. ft. of conditioned floor area.13,
     14, 15

                                       

                                       

                                       
 4.3   Duct boots sealed to floor, wall, or ceiling using caulk, foam, mastic tape, or mastic paste.
                                       
                                       
                                       

 Inspection Guidelines
                                      Must
                                    Correct
  Rater
 Verified
  N/A
 5. Whole-Building Delivered Ventilation
 5.1 Rater-measured ventilation rate is within 100-120% of HVAC contractor design value (2.11).16
                                       
                                       
                                       
 6. Controls
 6.1 Air flow is produced when central HVAC fan is energized (set thermostat to "fan").
                                       
                                       
                                       
 6.2 Cool air flow is produced when the cooling cycle is energized (set thermostat to "cool").17
                                       
                                       
                                       
 6.3 Heated air flow is produced when the heating cycle is energized (set thermostat to "heat").17
                                       
                                       
                                       
 6.4 Continuously-operating ventilation & exhaust fans include readily accessible override controls.
                                       
                                       
                                       
 6.5 Ventilation controls labeled, unless function is obvious (e.g., bathroom exhaust fan).
                                       
                                       
                                       
 7. Ventilation Air Inlets & Ventilation Source
    7.1  All ventilation air inlets located >10 ft. of stretched-string distance from known contamination sources such as stack, vent, exhaust hood, or vehicle exhaust. Exception: ventilation air inlets in the wall > 3 ft. from dryer exhausts and contamination sources exiting through the roof. 18

                                       

                                       

                                       
    7.2 Ventilation air inlets > 2 ft. above grade or roof deck in Climate Zones 1-3 or > 4 ft. above grade or roof deck in Climate Zones 4-8 and not obstructed by snow, plantings, condensing units or other
    material at time of inspection.

                                       

                                       

                                       
 7.3  Ventilation air inlets provided with rodent / insect screen with < 0.5 inch mesh.19
                                       
                                       
                                       
    7.4 Ventilation air comes directly from outdoors and not from adjacent dwelling units, garages, crawlspaces, or attics.

                                       

                                       

                                       
 8. Local Mechanical Exhaust
 In each kitchen and bathroom, system installed that exhausts directly to the outdoors and meets one of the following Rater-measured airflow standards: 16, 20, 21
 Location
 Continuous Rate
 Intermittent Rate 22
 8.1 Kitchen
 > 5 ACH, based on kitchen volume 23
 > 100 CFM 24
                                       
                                       
                                       
 8.2 Bathroom
 > 20 CFM
 > 50 CFM
                                       
                                       
                                       
 8.3 If fans share common exhaust duct, back-draft dampers installed.
                                       
                                       
                                       
 8.4 Common exhaust duct not shared by fans in separate dwellings.25
                                       
                                       
                                       
   8.5 Clothes dryers vented directly to outdoors, except for ventless dryers equipped with a condensate drain.

                                       

                                       

                                       
 9. Ventilation & Exhaust Fan Ratings (Exemptions for HVAC and Remote-Mounted Fans) 26
 9.1  Intermittent supply & exhaust fans rated at < 3 sones by mfr., unless rated flow > 400 CFM
                                       
                                       
                                       
 9.2  Continuous supply & exhaust fans rated at < 1 sone by manufacturer.
                                       
                                       
                                       
    9.3  Bathroom fans used as part of a whole-house mechanical ventilation system shall be ENERGY STAR qualified; unless rated flow rate > 500 CFM.

                                       

                                       

                                       
 10. Combustion Appliances
 10.1 Furnaces, boilers, and water heaters located within the home‟s pressure boundary are
    mechanically drafted or direct-vented to outdoors. As an exception, atmospherically vented equipment is allowed in Climate Zone 1-3. For atmospherically vented furnaces, boilers, and
    water heaters, the Rater has conducted BPI‟s or RESNET‟s combustion safety test procedure
    and determined that the CO test results are less than 25 ppm and the combustion appliance zone depressurization limit is not exceeded. 27, 28, 29

                                       

                                       

                                       
    10.2 For fireplaces that are not mechanically drafted or direct-vented to outdoors, total net rated exhaust flow of the two largest exhaust fans (excluding summer cooling fans) is < 15 CFM per
    100 sq. ft. of occupiable space when at full capacity or the Rater has verified that the pressure differential is < 5 Pa using BPI‟s or RESNET‟s combustion safety test procedure. 20, 28, 29, 30, 31

                                       

                                       

                                       
    10.3 If unvented combustion appliances other than cooking ranges are located inside the home‟s pressure boundary, the Rater has conducted RESNET‟s or BPI‟s combustion safety test procedure and determined that the ambient CO test results are less than 35 ppm.32

 11. Filtration
 11.1 At least one MERV 6 or higher filter installed in each ducted mechanical system.33
                                       
                                       
                                       
 11.2 All return air and mechanically supplied outdoor air pass through filter prior to conditioning.
                                       
                                       
                                       
 11.3 Filter located and installed so as to facilitate access and regular service by the owner.34
                                       
                                       
                                       
    11.4 Filter access panel includes gasket or comparable sealing mechanism and fits snugly against the exposed edge of filter when closed to prevent bypass.35

                                       

                                       

                                       
 Rater Name:  	  Date Checklist Inspected:

 Rater Signature:   	  Rater Company Name:

    1.	The HVAC System Quality Installation Rater Checklist is designed to align with the requirements of ASHRAE 62.2-2010 and published addenda and ANSI / ACCA‟s 5 QI-2007 protocol, thereby improving the performance of HVAC equipment in new homes when compared to homes built to minimum code. However, these features alone cannot prevent all ventilation , indoor air quality, and HVAC problems, for instance those caused by a lack of occupant maintenance. Therefore, this checklist is not a guarantee of proper ventilation, indoor air quality, or HVAC performance. This checklist with supporting documents may also be used to demonstrate compliance with Indoor airPLUS specifications 4.1, 4.2, 4.5, 4.6, and 7.1.

    2.	The Rater is only responsible for ensuring that the Contractor has completed the Contractor checklist in its entirety and ver ifying the discrete objective parameters referenced in Section 1 of this checklist, not for assessing the accuracy of the load cal culations or field verifications included or to verify the accuracy of every input on the Contractor checklist.

    3.	The Rater shall either confirm that the contractor selected the geographically closest available location or collect from the contractor a justification for the selected location. The Rater need not evaluate the legitimacy of the justification to qualify the home.

    4.	The number of occupants among all HVAC systems in the home shall be equal to the number of RESNET-defined bedrooms plus one. Occupants listed for systems for which the header of the contractor checklist indicates that it is designed to handle temporary occupant loads, as defined in footnote 3 of the HVAC System Quality Installation Contractor Checklist, shall be permitted to exceed this limit.

 5.	"Predominant" is defined as the SHGC value used in the greatest amount of window area in the home.

    6.	For cooling systems, the next largest nominal piece of equipment may be used that is available to satisfy the latent and sens ible requirements. Single-speed systems generally have OEM nominal size increments of (1/2) ton.  Multi-speed or multi-stage equipment may have OEM nominal size increments of one ton. Therefore, the use of these advanced system types can provide extra flexibility to meet the equipment sizing requirements.

    7.	In cases where the condenser unit is installed after the time of inspection by the Rater, the HVAC manufacturer and model numbers on installed equipment can be documented through the use of photographs provided by the HVAC Contractor after installation is complete.

 8.	If contractor has indicated that an OEM test procedure has been used in place of a sub-cooling or super-heat process and
    documentation has been attached that defines this procedure, then the box for "n/a" shall be checked for this item.

    9.	Kinks are to be avoided and are caused when ducts are bent across sharp corners such as framing members. Sharp bends are to be avoided and occur when the radius of the turn in the duct is less than one duct diameter.

    10.  Ducts shall not include coiled or looped ductwork except to the extent needed for acoustical control. Balancing dampers or proper duct sizing shall be used instead of loops to limit flow to diffusers. When balancing dampers are used, they shall be located at the trunk to limit noise unless the trunk will not be accessible when the balancing process is conducted.  In such cases, Opposable Blade Dampers (OBD) or dampers that are located in the duct boot are permitted.

 11.  For HVAC system with multi-speed fans, the highest design fan speed shall be used when verifying this requirement.

    12.  EPA recommends, but does not require, that all metal ductwork (e.g., exhaust ducts, duct boots) be insulated and that insulation be sealed to duct boots to prevent condensation.

    13.  Duct  leakage  shall  be  determined  and  documented  by  a  Rater  using  a  RESNET-approved  testing  protocol  only  after  all components of the system have been installed (e.g., air handler and register grilles). Leakage limits shall be assessed on a per- system, rather than per-home, basis. Testing of duct leakage to the outside can be waived if all ducts & air handling equipment are located within the home‟s air and thermal barriers AND envelope leakage has been tested to be less than or equal to half of the Prescriptive Path infiltration limit for the Climate Zone where the home is to be built.

 14.  For all homes that have less than 1,200 sq ft of conditioned floor area (CFA), total measured duct leakage shall be < 8 CFM25 per
    100 sq. ft. of CFA and measured duct leakage to outdoors shall be < 5 CFM25 per 100 sq. ft. of CFA.

    15.  If total duct leakage is < 4 CFM25 per 100 sq. ft. of conditioned floor area, or < 5 CFM25 per 100 sq. ft. of conditioned floor area for homes that have less than 1,200 sq. ft. of conditioned floor area, then leakage to outdoors need not be tested.

    16. The whole-house ventilation air flow and local exhaust air flows shall be measured by the Rater using a flow hood, flow grid, anemometer (in accordance with AABC, NEBB or ASHRAE procedures), or substantially equivalent method.

    17.  In cases where the condenser unit is installed after the time of inspection by the Rater, the Rater is exempt from verifying item 6.2 when the condenser is for an AC unit and also item 6.3 when the condenser is for a heatpump unit.

    18.  The outlet and inlet of balanced ventilation systems shall meet these spacing requirements unless manufacturer instructions indicate that a smaller distance may be used. However, if this occurs the manufacturer‟s instructions shall be collected for documentation purposes.

    19.  Without proper maintenance, ventilation air inlet screens often become filled with debris. Therefore, EPA recommends, but does not require, that these ventilation air inlets be located so as to facilitate access and regular service by the owner.

    20.  Per ASHRAE 62.2-2010, an exhaust system is one or more fans that remove air from the building, causing outdoor air to enter by ventilation inlets or normal leakage paths through the building envelope. Examples include bath exhaust fans, range hoods, and clothes dryers

 21.  Per ASHRAE 62.2-2010, a bathroom is any room containing a bathtub, shower, spa, or similar source of moisture.

    22.  An intermittent mechanical exhaust system, where provided, shall be designed to operate as needed by the occupant. Control devices shall not impede occupant control in intermittent systems.

    23.  Kitchen volume shall be determined by drawing the smallest possible rectangle on the floor plan that encompasses all cabinets, pantries, islands, and peninsulas and multiplying by the average ceiling height for this area. Cabinet volume shall be included in the kitchen volume calculation.

    24.  If the flow rate of the selected exhaust fan is less than 5 ACH, based on kitchen volume, then a vented range hood or applian ce- range hood combination is required rather than a remote fan that is not integral to the range. Also, for intermittent kitchen exhaust fans that are integrated with microwaves, a rated air flow rate that is > 200 CFM may be used in lieu of measuring the actual air flow rate.

    25.  Exhaust outlets from more than one dwelling unit may be served by a single exhaust fan if the fan runs continuously or if each outlet has a back-draft damper to prevent cross-contamination when the fan is not running.

    26.  Fans exempted from this requirement include HVAC air handlers and remote-mounted fans (i.e., fans outside habitable spaces, bathrooms, toilets, and hallways and with > 4 ft. ductwork between fan and intake grills). Per ASHRAE 62.2-2010, habitable spaces are intended for continual human occupancy; such space generally includes areas used for living, sleeping, dining, and cooking but does not generally include bathrooms, toilets, hallways, storage areas, closets, or utility rooms.

    27. Per the 2009 International Mechanical Code, a direct-vent appliance is one that is constructed and installed so that all air for combustion is derived from the outdoor atmosphere and all flue gases are discharged to the outside atmosphere. Furthermore, a mechanical draft system is a venting system designed to remove flue or vent gases by mechanical means consis ting of an induced draft portion under non-positive static pressure or a forced draft portion under positive static pressure.

    28.  The pressure boundary is the primary air enclosure boundary separating indoor and outdoor air.  For example, a volume that ha s more leakage to outside than to conditioned space would be outside the pressure boundary.

    29.  Raters shall use either the Building Performance Institute‟s (BPI‟s) Combustion Safety Test Procedure for Vented Appliances or RESNET‟s Interim Guidelines for Combustion Appliance Testing and Writing Work Scope and be BPI-certified or RESNET- accredited to follow the protocol.

    30.  Per ASHRAE 62.2-2010 and pub. addenda, the term "net-exhaust flow" is defined as flow through an exhaust system minus the compensating outdoor airflow through any supply system that is interlocked to the exhaust system. "Net supply flow" is intended to represent the inverse. If net exhaust flow exceeds allowable limit, it shall be reduced or compensating outdoor airflow provided.

    31.  Per ASHRAE 62.2-2010, occupiable space is any enclosed space inside the pressure boundary and intended for human activities, including, but not limited to, all habitable spaces, toilets, closets, halls, storage and utility areas, an d laundry areas.  See footnote
    26 for definition of "habitable spaces".

 32.  The minimum volume of combustion air required for safe operation by the manufacturer and/or code shall be met or exceeded.
    Also, in accordance with the National Fuel Gas Code, ANSI Z223.l/NFPA54, unvented room heaters shall not be installed in bathrooms or bedrooms.

 33.  Per ASHRAE 62.2-2010, ducted mechanical systems are those that supply air to an occupiable space through ductwork exceeding
    10 ft in length and through a thermal conditioning component, except for evaporative coolers. Systems that do not meet this definition are exempt from this requirement. Also, mini-split systems typically do not have MERV-rated filters available for use and are, therefore, also exempted under this version of the guidelines.

    34.  HVAC filters located in the attic shall be considered accessible to the owner if drop-down stairs provide access to attic and a permanently installed walkway has been provided between the attic access location and the filter.

    EPA Form 5900-271
The government estimates the average time needed to fill out this form is 0.45 hours and welcomes suggestions for reducing this effort. Send comments (referencing OMB Control Number) to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. EPA (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460.

35.  The filter media box (i.e., the component in the HVAC system that houses the filter) may be either site-fabricated by the installer or pre-fabricated by the manufacturer to meet this requirement. These requirements only apply when the filter is installed in a filter media box located in the HVAC system, not when the filter is installed flush with the return grill.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 227 (Monday, November 25, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70216-70218]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28183]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0561; Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-23-AD;
Amendment 39-17680; AD 2013-24-06]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH
Reciprocating Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH TAE 125-01 reciprocating engines. This
AD requires applying sealant to close the engine clutch housing
(crankcase assembly) opening. This AD was prompted by a report of
engine power loss due to engine coolant contaminating the engine
clutch. The design of the engine allows the crankcase assembly opening
to be susceptible to contamination from external sources. We are
issuing this AD to prevent in-flight engine power loss, which could
result in loss of control of, and damage to, the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective December 30, 2013.

ADDRESSES: The Docket Operations office is located at Docket Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-
0001.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frederick Zink, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to the specified products. The
NPRM was published in the Federal Register on August 5, 2013 (78 FR
47228). The NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    A power loss event was reported on an aeroplane equipped with a
TAE 125-01 engine. The investigation results showed that the
probable cause was contamination of the engine clutch by coolant
spillage during the last maintenance operation. The contamination
penetrated the clutch housing through an opening located under the
coolant tank that was only closed by a not fluid-tight plastic
cover.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2013-0561-0002.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (78 FR 47228, August 5,
2013).

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this AD as proposed.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect about 140 engines of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it will take about 2.5 hours per engine
to comply with this AD. The average labor rate is $85 per hour.
Required parts cost about $110 per engine. Based on these figures, we
estimate the cost of this AD on U.S. operators to be $45,150.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this 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 this AD:
    (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),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction, and
    (4) 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 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 (AD):

2013-24-06 Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH: Amendment 39-17680;
Docket No. FAA-2013-0561; Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-23-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective December 30, 2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH TAE 125-01
reciprocating engines.

(d) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of engine power loss due to
engine coolant contaminating the engine clutch. The design of the
engine allows the crankcase assembly opening to be susceptible to
contamination from external sources. We are issuing this AD to
prevent in-flight engine power loss, which could result in loss of
control of, and damage to, the airplane.

(e) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) After the effective date of this AD at the next annual or
100-hour inspection, whichever comes first, apply sealant to close
the engine clutch housing (crankcase assembly) opening.
    (2) Thereafter, reapply sealant to the engine clutch housing
(crankcase assembly) opening, whenever the sealant is found to be
not liquid-tight, or is removed.
    (3) Guidance on the sealant and application can be found in
Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH Service Bulletin No.TM TAE 125-0022,
dated August 8, 2012.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, may approve AMOCs
to this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your
request.

(g) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Frederick Zink,
Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2013-0109,
dated May 22, 2013, for related information. You may examine the
MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2013-0561-0002.
    (3) Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH Service Bulletin No. TM TAE
125-0022, dated August 8, 2012, which is not incorporated by
reference in this AD, can be obtained from Thielert Aircraft Engines
GmbH, using the contact information in paragraph (g)(4) of this AD.
    (4) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH, Platanenstrasse 14 D-09350,
Lichtenstein, Germany, phone: +49-37204-696-0; fax: +49-37204-696-
55; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (5) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

(h) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on November 14, 2013.
Colleen M. D'Alessandro,
Assistant Directorate Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-28183 Filed 11-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 18, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57546-57554]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22837]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1998-0010, EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0598, 0599, 0600, 0601,
0602, 0603, 0604, 0606, 0607 and 0647; FRL-9722-7]

National Priorities List, Proposed Rule No. 57

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (``CERCLA'' or ``the Act''), as amended, requires that
the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(``NCP'') include a list of national priorities among the known
releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants or
contaminants throughout the United States. The National Priorities List
(``NPL'') constitutes this list. The NPL is intended primarily to guide
the Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'' or ``the agency'') in
determining which sites warrant further investigation. These further
investigations will allow the EPA to assess the nature and extent of
public health and environmental risks associated with the site and to
determine what CERCLA-financed remedial action(s), if any, may be
appropriate. This rule proposes to: (1) Add seven sites to the General
Superfund section of the NPL; (2) add one site to the Federal
Facilities section of the NPL; (3) correct an error in the Appendix B
footnote description; and (4) correct an error in the state location
for Five Points PCE Plume site. This rule also withdraws one site from
proposal to the NPL.

DATES: Comments regarding any of these proposed listings must be
submitted (postmarked) on or before November 19, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Identify the appropriate Docket Number from the table below.

                                      Docket Identification Numbers by Site
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Site name                    City/county, state                       Docket ID No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pike and Mulberry Streets PCE Plume  Martinsville, IN...........  EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0598.
Former United Zinc & Associated      Iola, KS...................  EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0599.
 Smelters.
Creese & Cook Tannery (Former).....  Danvers, MA................  EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0600.
Walton & Lonsbury Inc..............  Attleboro, MA..............  EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0601.
Matlack, Inc.......................  Woolwich Township, NJ......  EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0602.
Riverside Industrial Park..........  Newark, NJ.................  EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0603.
Clinch River Corporation...........  Harriman, TN...............  EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0604.
700 South 1600 East PCE Plume......  Salt Lake City, UT.........  EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0647.

Evergreen Manor Ground Water         Winnebago County, IL.......  EPA-HQ-SFUND-1998-0010.
 Contamination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Submit your comments, identified by the appropriate Docket number,
by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: Mail comments (no facsimiles or tapes) to Docket
Coordinator, Headquarters, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, CERCLA
Docket Office, (Mailcode 5305T), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery or Express Mail: Send comments (no
facsimiles or tapes) to Docket Coordinator, Headquarters, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, CERCLA Docket Office, 1301
Constitution Avenue NW., EPA West, Room 3334, Washington, DC 20004.
Such deliveries are accepted only during the Docket's normal hours of
operation (8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
federal holidays).
    Instructions: Direct your comments to the appropriate Docket number
(see table above). The EPA's policy is that all comments received will
be included in the public Docket without change and may be made
available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system; that means the EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public Docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with
any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due
to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the
EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should
avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be
free of any defects or viruses. For additional Docket addresses and
further details on their contents, see section II, ``Public Review/
Public Comment,'' of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION portion of this
preamble.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terry Jeng, phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Site Assessment and Remedy Decisions Branch,
Assessment and Remediation Division, Office of Superfund Remediation
and Technology Innovation (Mailcode 5204P), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460;
or the Superfund Hotline, phone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER> in the
Washington, DC metropolitan area.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. What are CERCLA and SARA?
    B. What is the NCP?
    C. What is the National Priorities List (NPL)?
    D. How are sites listed on the NPL?
    E. What happens to sites on the NPL?
    F. Does the NPL define the boundaries of sites?
    G. How are sites removed from the NPL?
    H. May the EPA delete portions of sites from the NPL as they are
cleaned up?
    I. What is the Construction Completion List (CCL)?
    J. What Is the Sitewide Ready for Anticipated Use Measure?
II. Public Review/Public Comment
    A. May I review the documents relevant to this proposed rule?
    B. How do I access the documents?
    C. What documents are available for public review at the
Headquarters Docket?
    D. What documents are available for public review at the
Regional Dockets?
    E. How do I submit my comments?
    F. What happens to my comments?
    G. What should I consider when preparing my comments?
    H. May I submit comments after the public comment period is
over?
    I. May I view public comments submitted by others?
    J. May I submit comments regarding sites not currently proposed
to the NPL?
    K. What is State/tribal correspondence concerning NPL listing?
III. Contents of This Proposed Rule
    A. Proposed Additions to the NPL
    B. Withdrawal of Site From Proposal to the NPL
    C. Proposed Correction of Appendix B Footnote ``A'' Description
    D. Proposed Correction of State Location for Five Points PCE
Plume Site
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    1. What is Executive Order 12866?
    2. Is this proposed rule subject to Executive Order 12866
review?
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    1. What is the Paperwork Reduction Act?
    2. Does the Paperwork Reduction Act apply to this proposed rule?
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    1. What is the Regulatory Flexibility Act?
    2. How has the EPA complied with the Regulatory Flexibility Act?
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    1. What is the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)?
    2. Does UMRA apply to this proposed rule?
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    1. What is Executive Order 13132?
    2. Does Executive Order 13132 apply to this proposed rule?
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    1. What is Executive Order 13175?
    2. Does Executive Order 13175 apply to this proposed rule?
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    1. What is Executive Order 13045?
    2. Does Executive Order 13045 apply to this proposed rule?
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
    1. What is Executive Order 13211?
    2. Does Executive Order 13211 apply to this proposed rule?
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    1. What is the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act?
    2. Does the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
apply to this proposed rule?
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
    1. What is Executive Order 12898?
    2. Does Executive Order 12898 apply to this proposed rule?

I. Background

A. What are CERCLA and SARA?

    In 1980, Congress enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601-9675 (``CERCLA'' or

``the Act''), in response to the dangers of uncontrolled releases or
threatened releases of hazardous substances, and releases or
substantial threats of releases into the environment of any pollutant
or contaminant that may present an imminent or substantial danger to
the public health or welfare. CERCLA was amended on October 17, 1986,
by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (``SARA''), Public
Law 99-499, 100 Stat. 1613 et seq.

B. What is the NCP?

    To implement CERCLA, the EPA promulgated the revised National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (``NCP''), 40 CFR
Part 300, on July 16, 1982 (47 FR 31180), pursuant to CERCLA section
105 and Executive Order 12316 (46 FR 42237, August 20, 1981). The NCP
sets guidelines and procedures for responding to releases and
threatened releases of hazardous substances or releases or substantial
threats of releases into the environment of any pollutant or
contaminant that may present an imminent or substantial danger to the
public health or welfare. The EPA has revised the NCP on several
occasions. The most recent comprehensive revision was on March 8, 1990
(55 FR 8666).
    As required under section 105(a)(8)(A) of CERCLA, the NCP also
includes ``criteria for determining priorities among releases or
threatened releases throughout the United States for the purpose of
taking remedial action and, to the extent practicable taking into
account the potential urgency of such action, for the purpose of taking
removal action.'' ``Removal'' actions are defined broadly and include a
wide range of actions taken to study, clean up, prevent or otherwise
address releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances,
pollutants or contaminants (42 U.S.C. 9601(23)).

C. What is the National Priorities List (NPL)?

    The NPL is a list of national priorities among the known or
threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants
throughout the United States. The list, which is appendix B of the NCP
(40 CFR Part 300), was required under section 105(a)(8)(B) of CERCLA,
as amended. Section 105(a)(8)(B) defines the NPL as a list of
``releases'' and the highest priority ``facilities'' and requires that
the NPL be revised at least annually. The NPL is intended primarily to
guide the EPA in determining which sites warrant further investigation
to assess the nature and extent of public health and environmental
risks associated with a release of hazardous substances, pollutants or
contaminants. The NPL is only of limited significance, however, as it
does not assign liability to any party or to the owner of any specific
property. Also, placing a site on the NPL does not mean that any
remedial or removal action necessarily need be taken.
    For purposes of listing, the NPL includes two sections, one of
sites that are generally evaluated and cleaned up by the EPA (the
``General Superfund Section''), and one of sites that are owned or
operated by other federal agencies (the ``Federal Facilities
Section''). With respect to sites in the Federal Facilities Section,
these sites are generally being addressed by other federal agencies.
Under Executive Order 12580 (52 FR 2923, January 29, 1987) and CERCLA
section 120, each federal agency is responsible for carrying out most
response actions at facilities under its own jurisdiction, custody or
control, although the EPA is responsible for preparing a Hazard Ranking
System (``HRS'') score and determining whether the facility is placed
on the NPL.

D. How are sites listed on the NPL?

    There are three mechanisms for placing sites on the NPL for
possible remedial action (see 40 CFR 300.425(c) of the NCP): (1) A site
may be included on the NPL if it scores sufficiently high on the HRS,
which the EPA promulgated as appendix A of the NCP (40 CFR Part 300).
The HRS serves as a screening tool to evaluate the relative potential
of uncontrolled hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants to
pose a threat to human health or the environment. On December 14, 1990
(55 FR 51532), the EPA promulgated revisions to the HRS partly in
response to CERCLA section 105(c), added by SARA. The revised HRS
evaluates four pathways: ground water, surface water, soil exposure and
air. As a matter of agency policy, those sites that score 28.50 or
greater on the HRS are eligible for the NPL. (2) Pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
9605(a)(8)(B), each state may designate a single site as its top
priority to be listed on the NPL, without any HRS score. This provision
of CERCLA requires that, to the extent practicable, the NPL include one
facility designated by each state as the greatest danger to public
health, welfare or the environment among known facilities in the state.
This mechanism for listing is set out in the NCP at 40 CFR
300.425(c)(2). (3) The third mechanism for listing, included in the NCP
at 40 CFR 300.425(c)(3), allows certain sites to be listed without any
HRS score, if all of the following conditions are met:
     The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
(ATSDR) of the U.S. Public Health Service has issued a health advisory
that recommends dissociation of individuals from the release.
     The EPA determines that the release poses a significant
threat to public health.
     The EPA anticipates that it will be more cost-effective to
use its remedial authority than to use its removal authority to respond
to the release.

The EPA promulgated an original NPL of 406 sites on September 8, 1983
(48 FR 40658) and generally has updated it at least annually.

E. What happens to sites on the NPL?

    A site may undergo remedial action financed by the Trust Fund
established under CERCLA (commonly referred to as the ``Superfund'')
only after it is placed on the NPL, as provided in the NCP at 40 CFR
300.425(b)(1). (``Remedial actions'' are those ``consistent with
permanent remedy, taken instead of or in addition to removal actions. *
* *'' 42 U.S.C. 9601(24).) However, under 40 CFR 300.425(b)(2) placing
a site on the NPL ``does not imply that monies will be expended.'' The
EPA may pursue other appropriate authorities to respond to the
releases, including enforcement action under CERCLA and other laws.

F. Does the NPL Define the Boundaries of Sites?

    The NPL does not describe releases in precise geographical terms;
it would be neither feasible nor consistent with the limited purpose of
the NPL (to identify releases that are priorities for further
evaluation), for it to do so. Indeed, the precise nature and extent of
the site are typically not known at the time of listing.
    Although a CERCLA ``facility'' is broadly defined to include any
area where a hazardous substance has ``come to be located'' (CERCLA
section 101(9)), the listing process itself is not intended to define
or reflect the boundaries of such facilities or releases. Of course,
HRS data (if the HRS is used to list a site) upon which the NPL
placement was based will, to some extent, describe the release(s) at
issue. That is, the NPL site would include all releases evaluated as
part of that HRS analysis.
    When a site is listed, the approach generally used to describe the
relevant release(s) is to delineate a geographical area (usually the
area within an installation or plant boundaries) and identify the site
by reference to that area. However, the NPL site is not necessarily
coextensive with the

boundaries of the installation or plant, and the boundaries of the
installation or plant are not necessarily the ``boundaries'' of the
site. Rather, the site consists of all contaminated areas within the
area used to identify the site, as well as any other location where
that contamination has come to be located, or from where that
contamination came.
    In other words, while geographic terms are often used to designate
the site (e.g., the ``Jones Co. plant site'') in terms of the property
owned by a particular party, the site, properly understood, is not
limited to that property (e.g., it may extend beyond the property due
to contaminant migration), and conversely may not occupy the full
extent of the property (e.g., where there are uncontaminated parts of
the identified property, they may not be, strictly speaking, part of
the ``site''). The ``site'' is thus neither equal to, nor confined by,
the boundaries of any specific property that may give the site its
name, and the name itself should not be read to imply that this site is
coextensive with the entire area within the property boundary of the
installation or plant. In addition, the site name is merely used to
help identify the geographic location of the contamination, and is not
meant to constitute any determination of liability at a site. For
example, the name ``Jones Co. plant site,'' does not imply that the
Jones company is responsible for the contamination located on the plant
site.
    The EPA regulations provide that the Remedial Investigation
(``RI'') ``is a process undertaken * * * to determine the nature and
extent of the problem presented by the release'' as more information is
developed on site contamination, and which is generally performed in an
interactive fashion with the Feasibility Study (``FS'') (40 CFR 300.5).
During the RI/FS process, the release may be found to be larger or
smaller than was originally thought, as more is learned about the
source(s) and the migration of the contamination. However, the HRS
inquiry focuses on an evaluation of the threat posed and therefore the
boundaries of the release need not be exactly defined. Moreover, it
generally is impossible to discover the full extent of where the
contamination ``has come to be located'' before all necessary studies
and remedial work are completed at a site. Indeed, the known boundaries
of the contamination can be expected to change over time. Thus, in most
cases, it may be impossible to describe the boundaries of a release
with absolute certainty.
    Further, as noted above, NPL listing does not assign liability to
any party or to the owner of any specific property. Thus, if a party
does not believe it is liable for releases on discrete parcels of
property, it can submit supporting information to the agency at any
time after it receives notice it is a potentially responsible party.
    For these reasons, the NPL need not be amended as further research
reveals more information about the location of the contamination or
release.

G. How are sites removed from the NPL?

    The EPA may delete sites from the NPL where no further response is
appropriate under Superfund, as explained in the NCP at 40 CFR
300.425(e). This section also provides that the EPA shall consult with
states on proposed deletions and shall consider whether any of the
following criteria have been met:
    (i) Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all
appropriate response actions required;
    (ii) All appropriate Superfund-financed response has been
implemented and no further response action is required; or
    (iii) The remedial investigation has shown the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the environment, and taking of
remedial measures is not appropriate.

H. May the EPA delete portions of sites from the NPL as they are
cleaned up?

    In November 1995, the EPA initiated a policy to delete portions of
NPL sites where cleanup is complete (60 FR 55465, November 1, 1995).
Total site cleanup may take many years, while portions of the site may
have been cleaned up and made available for productive use.

I. What is the Construction completion List (CCL)?

    The EPA also has developed an NPL construction completion list
(``CCL'') to simplify its system of categorizing sites and to better
communicate the successful completion of cleanup activities (58 FR
12142, March 2, 1993). Inclusion of a site on the CCL has no legal
significance.
    Sites qualify for the CCL when: (1) Any necessary physical
construction is complete, whether or not final cleanup levels or other
requirements have been achieved; (2) the EPA has determined that the
response action should be limited to measures that do not involve
construction (e.g., institutional controls); or (3) the site qualifies
for deletion from the NPL. For the most up-to-date information on the
CCL, see the EPA's Internet site at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/ccl.htm

J. What is the sitewide ready for anticipated use measure?

    The Sitewide Ready for Anticipated Use measure (formerly called
Sitewide Ready-for-Reuse) represents important Superfund
accomplishments and the measure reflects the high priority the EPA
places on considering anticipated future land use as part of the remedy
selection process. See Guidance for Implementing the Sitewide Ready-
for-Reuse Measure, May 24, 2006, OSWER 9365.0-36. This measure applies
to final and deleted sites where construction is complete, all cleanup
goals have been achieved, and all institutional or other controls are
in place. The EPA has been successful on many occasions in carrying out
remedial actions that ensure protectiveness of human health and the
environment for current and future land uses, in a manner that allows
contaminated properties to be restored to environmental and economic
vitality. For further information, please go to http://www.epa.gov/superfund/programs/recycle/pdf/sitewide_a.pdf

K. What is State/tribal correspondence concerning NPL listing?

    In order to maintain close coordination with states and tribes in
the NPL listing decision process, the EPA's policy is to determine the
position of the states and tribes regarding sites that the EPA is
considering for listing. This consultation process is outlined in two
memoranda that can be found at the following web site: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/hrsres/policy/govlet.pdf. The EPA is
improving the transparency of the process by which state and tribal
input is solicited. The EPA will be using the web and where appropriate
more structured state and tribal correspondence that (1) explains the
concerns at the site and the EPA's rationale for proceeding; (2)
requests an explanation of how the state intends to address the site if
placement on the NPL is not favored; and (3) emphasizes the transparent
nature of the process by informing states that information on their
responses will be publicly available.
    A model letter and correspondence from this point forward between
the EPA and states and tribes where applicable, will be added to the
EPA's web site at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/query/queryhtm/nplstcor.htm

II. Public Review/Public Comment

A. May I review the documents relevant to this proposed rule?

    Yes, documents that form the basis for the EPA's evaluation and
scoring of the sites in this proposed rule are contained in public
Dockets located both at the EPA Headquarters in Washington, DC, and in
the Regional offices. These documents are also available by electronic
access at www.regulations.gov (see instructions in the ADDRESSES
section above).

B. How do I access the documents?

    You may view the documents, by appointment only, in the
Headquarters or the Regional Dockets after the publication of this
proposed rule. The hours of operation for the Headquarters Docket are
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday excluding federal
holidays. Please contact the Regional Dockets for hours.
    The following is the contact information for the EPA Headquarters
Docket: Docket Coordinator, Headquarters, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, CERCLA Docket Office, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., EPA West,
Room 3334, Washington, DC 20004; 202/566-0276. (Please note this is a
visiting address only. Mail comments to the EPA Headquarters as
detailed at the beginning of this preamble.)
    The contact information for the relevant Regional Dockets is as
follows:
     Joan Berggren, Region 1 (CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, VT), U.S.
EPA, Superfund Records and Information Center, 5 Post Office Square,
Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109-3912; 617/918-1417.
     Ildefonso Acosta, Region 2 (NJ, NY, PR, VI), U.S. EPA, 290
Broadway, New York, NY 10007-1866; 212/637-4344.
     Debbie Jourdan, Region 4 (AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN),
U.S. EPA, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Mailcode 9T25, Atlanta, GA 30303; 404/
562-8862.
     Todd Quesada, Region 5 (IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI), U.S. EPA
Superfund Division Librarian/SFD Records Manager SRC-7J, Metcalfe
Federal Building, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604; 312/
886-4465.
     Michelle Quick, Region 7 (IA, KS, MO, NE), U.S. EPA, 901
North 5th Street, Mailcode SUPRERNB, Kansas City, KS 66101; 913/551-
7335.
     Sabrina Forrest, Region 8 (CO, MT, ND, SD, UT, WY), U.S.
EPA, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Mailcode 8EPR-B, Denver, CO 80202-1129; 303/
312-6484.
    You may also request copies from the EPA Headquarters or the
Regional Dockets. An informal request, rather than a formal written
request under the Freedom of Information Act, should be the ordinary
procedure for obtaining copies of any of these documents. Please note
that due to the difficulty of reproducing oversized maps, oversized
maps may be viewed only in-person; since the EPA dockets are not
equipped to either copy and mail out such maps or scan them and send
them out electronically.
    You may use the Docket at www.regulations.gov to access documents
in the Headquarters Docket (see instructions included in the Addresses
section above). Please note that there are differences between the
Headquarters Docket and the Regional Dockets and those differences are
outlined below.

C. What documents are available for public review at the headquarters
docket?

    The Headquarters Docket for this proposed rule contains the
following for the sites proposed in this rule: HRS score sheets;
Documentation Records describing the information used to compute the
score; information for any sites affected by particular statutory
requirements or the EPA listing policies; and a list of documents
referenced in the Documentation Record.

D. What documents are available for public review at the Regional
Dockets?

    The Regional Dockets for this proposed rule contain all of the
information in the Headquarters Docket plus the actual reference
documents containing the data principally relied upon and cited by the
EPA in calculating or evaluating the HRS score for the sites. These
reference documents are available only in the Regional Dockets.

E. How do I submit my comments?

    Comments must be submitted to the EPA Headquarters as detailed at
the beginning of this preamble in the ``Addresses'' section. Please
note that the mailing addresses differ according to method of delivery.
There are two different addresses that depend on whether comments are
sent by express mail or by postal mail.

F. What happens to my comments?

    The EPA considers all comments received during the comment period.
Significant comments are typically addressed in a support document that
the EPA will publish concurrently with the Federal Register document
if, and when, the site is listed on the NPL.

G. What should I consider when preparing my comments?

    Comments that include complex or voluminous reports, or materials
prepared for purposes other than HRS scoring, should point out the
specific information that the EPA should consider and how it affects
individual HRS factor values or other listing criteria (Northside
Sanitary Landfill v. Thomas, 849 F.2d 1516 (D.C. Cir. 1988)). The EPA
will not address voluminous comments that are not referenced to the HRS
or other listing criteria. The EPA will not address comments unless
they indicate which component of the HRS documentation record or what
particular point in the EPA's stated eligibility criteria is at issue.

H. May I submit comments after the public comment period is over?

    Generally, the EPA will not respond to late comments. The EPA can
guarantee only that it will consider those comments postmarked by the
close of the formal comment period. The EPA has a policy of generally
not delaying a final listing decision solely to accommodate
consideration of late comments.

I. May I view public comments submitted by others?

    During the comment period, comments are placed in the Headquarters
Docket and are available to the public on an ``as received'' basis. A
complete set of comments will be available for viewing in the Regional
Dockets approximately one week after the formal comment period closes.
    All public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper
form, will be made available for public viewing in the electronic
public Docket at www.regulations.gov http://www/epa/goc/edocketas the
EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Once in the
public Dockets system, select ``search,'' then key in the appropriate
Docket ID number.

J. May I submit comments regarding sites not currently proposed to the
NPL?

    In certain instances, interested parties have written to the EPA
concerning sites that were not at that time proposed to the NPL. If
those sites are later proposed to the NPL, parties should review their
earlier concerns and, if still appropriate, resubmit those concerns for
consideration during the formal comment period. Site-specific

correspondence received prior to the period of formal proposal and
comment will not generally be included in the Docket.

III. Contents of This Proposed Rule

A. Proposed Additions to the NPL

    In today's proposed rule, the EPA is proposing to add seven sites
to the General Superfund section and one site to the Federal Facilities
section of the NPL. All of the sites in this proposed rulemaking are
being proposed based on HRS scores of 28.50 or above.
    The sites are presented in the table below.
    General Superfund section:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  State                              Site name                          City/county
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IN......................................  Pike and Mulberry Streets PCE    Martinsville.
                                           Plume.
KS......................................  Former United Zinc & Associated  Iola.
                                           Smelters.
MA......................................  Creese & Cook Tannery (Former).  Danvers.
MA......................................  Walton & Lonsbury Inc..........  Attleboro.
NJ......................................  Matlack, Inc...................  Woolwich Township.
NJ......................................  Riverside Industrial Park......  Newark.
TN......................................  Clinch River Corporation.......  Harriman.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Federal Facilities section:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  State                              Site name                          City/county
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UT......................................  700 South 1600 East PCE Plume..  Salt Lake City.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Withdrawal of Site From Proposal to the NPL

    The EPA is withdrawing its previous proposal to add the Evergreen
Manor Ground Water Contamination site in Winnebago County, Illinois to
the NPL because remedial action has been completed. Affected residences
have been connected to the public water supply; a county ordinance is
in place which restricts the installation of private wells in the
affected area; and contaminants of concern have remained below cleanup
standards since 2006. The proposed rule can be found at 63 FR 40247
(July 28, 1998). Refer to the Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-SFUND-1998-0010
for supporting documentation regarding this action.

C. Proposed Correction of Appendix B Footnote ``A'' Description

    The EPA is proposing to correct an error in the footnote ``A''
description in Appendix B to CFR Part 300. In Table 1, the incorrect
portion of the footnote currently reads ``(if scored, HRS score need
not be <= 28.50)''. In Table 2, the incorrect portion of the footnote
currently reads ``(if scored, HRS score need not be > 28.50)''. The EPA
is proposing to correct both footnote ``A'' descriptions by changing
them to ``A = Based on issuance of health advisory by Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (if scored, HRS score need not be
greater than or equal to 28.50)''. Comments may be submitted to Docket
number EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0606.

D. Proposed Correction of State Location for Five Points PCE Plume Site

    The EPA is proposing to correct an error in Table 1 of Appendix B
to CFR Part 300 in which the location of the Five Points PCE Plume site
is incorrectly listed as being in state of Washington. The correct
location of the Five Points PCE Plume is the state of Utah. Comments
may be submitted to Docket number EPA-HQ-SFUND-2012-0607.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

1. What is Executive Order 12866?
    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)), the
agency must determine whether a regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review
and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety or state, local or tribal governments or communities;
(2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter the
budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees or loan programs or
the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's
priorities or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.
2. Is this proposed rule subject to Executive Order 12866 review?
    No. The listing of sites on the NPL does not impose any obligations
on any entities. The listing does not set standards or a regulatory
regime and imposes no liability or costs. Any liability under CERCLA
exists irrespective of whether a site is listed. It has been determined
that this action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not subject to OMB
review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

1. What is the Paperwork Reduction Act?
    According to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information that requires OMB
approval under the PRA, unless it has been approved by OMB and displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations, after initial display in the preamble of the final
rules, are listed in 40 CFR Part 9.
2. Does the Paperwork Reduction Act apply to this proposed rule?
    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
The EPA has determined that the PRA does not apply

because this rule does not contain any information collection
requirements that require approval of the OMB.
    Burden means the total time, effort or financial resources expended
by persons to generate, maintain, retain or disclose or provide
information to or for a federal agency. This includes the time needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    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. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

1. What is the Regulatory Flexibility Act?
    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996) whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of
rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations and small governmental jurisdictions).
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of
an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the
Regulatory Flexibility Act to require federal agencies to provide a
statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
2. How has the EPA complied with the Regulatory Flexibility Act?
    This proposed rule listing sites on the NPL, if promulgated, would
not impose any obligations on any group, including small entities. This
proposed rule, if promulgated, also would establish no standards or
requirements that any small entity must meet, and would impose no
direct costs on any small entity. Whether an entity, small or
otherwise, is liable for response costs for a release of hazardous
substances depends on whether that entity is liable under CERCLA
107(a). Any such liability exists regardless of whether the site is
listed on the NPL through this rulemaking. Thus, this proposed rule, if
promulgated, would not impose any requirements on any small entities.
For the foregoing reasons, I certify that this proposed rule, if
promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

1. What is the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)?
    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on state, local and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the
EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-
benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``federal
mandates'' that may result in expenditures by state, local and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year. Before the EPA promulgates a rule
where a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally
requires the EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of
regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-
effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are
inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows the EPA
to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost-
effective or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator
publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was
not adopted. Before the EPA establishes any regulatory requirements
that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including
tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the
UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for
notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of
affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant federal
intergovernmental mandates and informing, educating and advising small
governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
2. Does UMRA apply to this proposed rule?
    This proposed rule does not contain a federal mandate that may
result in expenditures of $100 million or more for state, local and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one
year. Proposing a site on the NPL does not itself impose any costs.
Proposal does not mean that the EPA necessarily will undertake remedial
action. Nor does proposal require any action by a private party or
determine liability for response costs. Costs that arise out of site
responses result from site-specific decisions regarding what actions to
take, not directly from the act of proposing a site to be placed on the
NPL. Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements of section 202
and 205 of UMRA.
    This rule is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of
UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. As is mentioned
above, site proposal does not impose any costs and would not require
any action of a small government.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

1. What is Executive Order 13132?
    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by state and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' are defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects 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.''
2. Does Executive Order 13132 apply to this proposed rule?
    This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will
not have substantial direct effects 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,
as specified in Executive Order 13132, because it does not contain any
requirements applicable to states or other levels of government. Thus,
the requirements of the Executive Order do not apply to this proposed
rule.
    The EPA believes, however, that this proposed rule may be of
significant interest to state governments. In the

spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with the EPA policy to
promote communications between the EPA and state and local governments,
the EPA therefore consulted with state officials and/or representatives
of state governments early in the process of developing the rule to
permit them to have meaningful and timely input into its development.
All sites included in this proposed rule were referred to the EPA by
states for listing. For all sites in this rule, the EPA received
letters of support either from the governor or a state official who was
delegated the authority by the governor to speak on their behalf
regarding NPL listing decisions.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

1. What is Executive Order 13175?
    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000),
requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that
have tribal implications'' are defined in the Executive Order to
include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the federal government
and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the federal government and Indian tribes.''
2. Does Executive Order 13175 apply to this proposed rule?
    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. Proposing a site to the NPL does not impose any
costs on a tribe or require a tribe to take remedial action. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

1. What is Executive Order 13045?
    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that the EPA has reason to believe
may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory
action meets both criteria, the agency must evaluate the environmental
health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain
why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective
and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the agency.
2. Does Executive Order 13045 apply to this proposed rule?
    This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because
it is not an economically significant rule as defined by Executive
Order 12866, and because the agency does not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks addressed by this proposed rule
present a disproportionate risk to children.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution or Use

1. What is Executive Order 13211?
    Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use,'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) requires federal agencies to prepare a ``Statement
of Energy Effects'' when undertaking certain regulatory actions. A
Statement of Energy Effects describes the adverse effects of a
``significant energy action'' on energy supply, distribution and use,
reasonable alternatives to the action and the expected effects of the
alternatives on energy supply, distribution and use.
2. Does Executive Order 13211 apply to this proposed rule?
    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211, because it is not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution or use of energy. Further,
the agency has concluded that this rule is not likely to have any
adverse energy impacts because proposing a site to the NPL does not
require an entity to conduct any action that would require energy use,
let alone that which would significantly affect energy supply,
distribution or usage. Thus, Executive Order 13211 does not apply to
this action.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

1. What is the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act?
    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note), directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs the
EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the agency
decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus
standards.
2. Does the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act apply to
this proposed rule?
    No. This proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
Therefore, the EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus
standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

1. What is Executive Order 12898?
    Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
2. Does Executive Order 12898 apply to this proposed rule?
    The EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. As this rule does not impose any enforceable duty upon
state, tribal or local governments, this rule will neither increase nor
decrease environmental protection.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous substances, Hazardous waste, Intergovernmental relations,
Natural resources, Oil pollution, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water pollution control, Water
supply.

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O.
12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR,

1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p.
193.

    Dated: September 10, 2012.
Mathy Stanislaus,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
[FR Doc. 2012-22837 Filed 9-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: July 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 143)]
[Notices]
[Page 37255]
[DOCID:fr28jy09-73]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60252; File No. SR-NYSEAmex-2009-24]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Amex LLC; Order Granting
Accelerated Approval to a Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 70.25 To
Permit All Available Contra-Side Liquidity to Trigger the Execution of
a d-Quote

Correction

    In notice document E9-16545 beginning on page 34067 in the issue of
Tuesday, July 14, 2009, make the following correction:
    On page 34067, in the first column, the docket number should read
as set forth above.

[FR Doc. Z9-16545 Filed 7-27-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D


[Federal Register: August 13, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 157)]
[Notices]
[Page 47251-47252]
[DOCID:fr13au08-162]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Ninth Meeting, Special Committee 215 Aeronautical Mobile
Satellite (Route) Services Next Generation Satellite Services and
Equipment

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special Committee 215, Aeronautical Mobile
Satellite (Route) Services, Next Generation Satellite Services and
Equipment.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
second meeting of RTCA Special Committee 215, Aeronautical Mobile
Satellite (Route) Services, Next Generation Satellite Services and
Equipment.

DATES: The meeting will be held September 3-4, 2008, at 9 a.m.

ADDRESS: The meeting will be held at RTCA Headquarters, 1828 L Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RTCA Secretariat, 1828 L Street, NW.,
Suite 805, Washington, DC, 20036;

telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Web site http://
www.rtca.org for directions. POC: Mr. David Pitoniak, Phone: 713-324
3907. Note: Dress is Business Casual.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice
is hereby given for a Special Committee 215 meeting, The agenda will
include:
 September 3-4:
    [cir] Opening Plenary Session (Welcome, Introductions, and
Administrative Remarks, Review and Approval of Agenda for Ninth
Plenary)
    [cir] Review of Proposed Revisions to Terms of Reference (TOR)
    [dec221] Review and Approval of Eighth Meeting Summary (215-061;
RTCA Paper No. 295-07/SC215-XXX)
    [cir] DO-262 Normative Appendix
    [dec221] Status Update of Final Draft
    [dec221] Review and Approval of Proprietary Documentation White
Paper
    [dec221] Review of Action List and Outstanding Actions
    [dec221] Revision of TSO C-159 (FAA)
    [cir] DO-270 Normative Appendix
    [dec221] Report from Drafting Group
    [dec221] Review of Action List and Outstanding Actions
    [dec221] Subnetwork Operational Approval Process
    [cir] Closing Plenary Session (Other Business, Schedule Next
Plenary Meeting, Adjourn--Thursday, September 4, 2008; 12 noon).

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the ``FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT'' section. Members of the public
may present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 6, 2008.
Francisco C. Estrada,
RTCA Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. E8-18646 Filed 8-12-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M