PlantID RunNumber NewType FuelType NewPM SO2 Hg_ ParticleBoundIn Hg_ OxidizedIn Hg_ ElementalIn Percentage Split Units units ug/ dscm ug/ dscm ug/ dscm Polk Power 1 COAL GAS Bit Polk Power 2 COAL GAS Bit Polk Power 3 COAL GAS Bit Wabash 1 COAL GAS Bit Wabash 2 COAL GAS Bit Wabash 3 COAL GAS Bit Bin 1 Brayton 1 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 1.6 2.66 0.401 34.33% 57.07% 8.60%

Brayton 1 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 2.06 2.88 0.318 39.18% 54.77% 6.05%

Brayton 1 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 1.65 2.71 0.305 35.37% 58.09% 6.54%

Brayton 3 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 2.11 2.75 0.39 40.19% 52.38% 7.43%

Brayton 3 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 1.46 2.41 0.379 34.36% 56.72% 8.92%

Brayton 3 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 1.05 2.55 2.39 17.53% 42.57% 39.90%

Gibson0300 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 1.62 26.45 3.66 5.11% 83.36% 11.53%

Gibson0300 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 1.03 31.29 2.4 2.97% 90.12% 6.91%

Gibson0300 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 1.44 36.54 1.36 3.66% 92.88% 3.46%

Gibson1099 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 4.77 8.84 2.15 30.27% 56.09% 13.64%

Gibson1099 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 23.92 3.28 1.31 83.90% 11.50% 4.59%

Gibson1099 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 4.09 9.67 1.62 26.59% 62.87% 10.53%

Watson 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 2.86 0.97 0.73 62.72% 21.27% 16.01%

Watson 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 3.9 0.92 0.2 77.69% 18.33% 3.98%

Watson 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 3.66 0.47 0.075 87.04% 11.18% 1.78%

Widow 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 2.95 0.39 0.47 77.43% 10.24% 12.34%

Widow 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 2.55 0.385 0.435 75.67% 11.42% 12.91%

Widow 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS 2.55 0.415 0.44 74.89% 12.19% 12.92%

Bin 1 Averages 44.94% 44.61% 10.45%

Presque Isle 5 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ WET Bit  Pet Coke ESP CS 3.9229545455 0.41 0.12113636364 Presque Isle 5 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ WET Bit  Pet Coke ESP CS 3.1961363636 0.58704545455 0.50318181818 Presque Isle 5 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ WET Bit  Pet Coke ESP CS 4.5286363636 0.40068181818 0.21 Presque Isle 6 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ WET Bit  Pet Coke ESP CS 2.4413636364 0.55909090909 0.14909090909 Presque Isle 6 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ WET Bit  Pet Coke ESP CS 2.6556818182 0.64295454545 0.22363636364 Presque Isle 6 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ WET Bit  Pet Coke ESP CS 2.5997727273 0.54045454545 0.14909090909 Salem 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ SNCR/ DRY Bit ESP CS 2.81 0.22 0.34 Salem 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ SNCR/ DRY Bit ESP CS 2.83 0.034 0.14 Salem 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ SNCR/ DRY Bit ESP CS 2.85 0.042 0.14 Bin 4 Cliffside 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS 0.16 3.45 3.07 2.40% 51.65% 45.96%

Cliffside 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS 0.08 3.28 4.31 1.04% 42.76% 56.19%

Cliffside 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS 0.07 3.83 6.7 0.66% 36.13% 63.21%

Dunkirk 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS 0.16 7.56 2.49 1.57% 74.05% 24.39%

Dunkirk 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS .25 7.97 1.28 2.63% 83.89% 13.47%

Dunkirk 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS .32 8.43 2.91 2.74% 72.30% 24.96%

Gaston 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS 3.99 0.8 2.46 55.03% 11.03% 33.93%

Gaston 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS 2.4 0.66 3.32 37.62% 10.34% 52.04%

Gaston 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS 0.4 3.7 2.66 5.92% 54.73% 39.35%

Bin 4 Averages 12.18% 48.54% 39.28%

Bin 5 Mansfield 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit PARTSCRUB 0.33 6.68 1.22 4.01% 81.17% 14.82%

Mansfield 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit PARTSCRUB 0.57 7.65 1.62 5.79% 77.74% 16.46%

Mansfield 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit PARTSCRUB 0.34 6.81 1.39 3.98% 79.74% 16.28%

Washington 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit SORBESP 0.004 4.02 10.79 0.03% 27.14% 72.84%

Washington 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit SORBESP 0.01 7.19 10.22 0.06% 41.27% 58.67%

Washington 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit SORBESP 0.0045 5.87 9.12 0.03% 39.15% 60.82%

Bin 5 Averages 2.32% 57.70% 39.98%

Bin 6 Sammis 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit BAGHOUSE 9.814 0.4 0.495 91.64% 3.74% 4.62%

Sammis 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit BAGHOUSE 12.788 0.415 0.45 93.66% 3.04% 3.30%

Sammis 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit BAGHOUSE 12.186 0.425 0.43 93.44% 3.26% 3.30%

Valmont 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit BAGHOUSE 0.8 0.1 0.16 75.47% 9.43% 15.09%

Valmont 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit BAGHOUSE 0.8 0.06 0.12 81.63% 6.12% 12.24%

Valmont 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit BAGHOUSE 1.06 0.09 0.15 81.54% 6.92% 11.54%

Bin 6 Averages 86.23% 5.42% 8.35%

Bin 7 Mecklenburg 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit SDA 10.46 3.14 6.24 52.72% 15.83% 31.45%

Mecklenburg 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit SDA 5.35 3.98 0.0855 56.82% 42.27% 0.91%

Mecklenburg 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit SDA 6.52 2.87 0.0875 68.79% 30.28% 0.92%

Bin 7 Averages 59.45% 29.46% 11.09%

OGCComment1v21. xls Page 1 PlantID RunNumber NewType FuelType NewPM SO2 Hg_ ParticleBoundIn Hg_ OxidizedIn Hg_ ElementalIn Percentage Split Units units ug/ dscm ug/ dscm ug/ dscm Logan 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ SCR/ DRY Bit SDA 12.3 4.85 0.89 Logan 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ SCR/ DRY Bit SDA 12.39 3.58 0.32 Logan 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ SCR/ DRY Bit SDA 11.9 1.92 0.55 SEI 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ SCR/ DRY Bit SDA 11.31 0.25 0.19 SEI 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ SCR/ DRY Bit SDA 8 0.21 0.15 SEI 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ SCR/ DRY Bit SDA 10.21 0.21 0.135 Big Bend 1 CONV/ TURBO/ NOX/ WET Bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 4.56 2.25 Big Bend 2 CONV/ TURBO/ NOX/ WET Bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 4.54 2.13 Big Bend 3 CONV/ TURBO/ NOX/ WET Bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 4.14 2.07 Milliken 2 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 5.25 1.91 Milliken 2 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.72 5.59 2.10 Milliken 2 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 1.62 4.88 2.42 Navajo 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.025 2.39 2.91 Navajo 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.025 0.38 3.3 Navajo 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.0225 0.52 2.92 Alabama 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0 2.74 1.72 Alabama 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 1.23 3.16 1.72 Alabama 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 2.72 2.8 1.59 Morrow 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.044 8.22 3.36 Morrow 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.0065 6.51 3.21 Morrow 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.0075 5.51 2.62 Clover 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit BAGHOUSE WETSCRUB 0.05 0.86 0.96 Clover 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit BAGHOUSE WETSCRUB 0.03 0.94 1.09 Clover 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit BAGHOUSE WETSCRUB 0.07 1.02 0.54 Intermountain 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit BAGHOUSE WETSCRUB 0.009 0.94 0.125 Intermountain 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit BAGHOUSE WETSCRUB 0.008 1.05 0.127 Intermountain 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit BAGHOUSE WETSCRUB 0.0085 1.21 0.145 Bin 13 Neal 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS 0.147 4.11 5.4 1.52% 42.56% 55.92%

Neal 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS 0.058 3.57 6.78 0.56% 34.30% 65.14%

Neal 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS 0.015 2.79 2.97 0.26% 48.31% 51.43%

Montrose 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS 1.69 1.62 5.23 19.79% 18.97% 61.24%

Montrose 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS 0.82 2.3 4.45 10.83% 30.38% 58.78%

Montrose 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS 1.51 2.66 4.33 17.76% 31.29% 50.94%

Newton 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS 0.04 0.55 9.16 0.41% 5.64% 93.95%

Newton 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS 0.035 0.59 9.28 0.35% 5.96% 93.69%

Newton 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS 0.08 1.56 8.77 0.77% 14.99% 84.25%

Bin 13 Averages 5.81% 25.82% 68.37%

Bin 14 Cholla 3 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP HS 0.04 1.84 0.00% 2.13% 97.87%

Cholla 3 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP HS 0.3 0.44 0.00% 40.54% 59.46%

Cholla 3 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP HS 0.41 0.59 0.00% 41.00% 59.00%

Columbia 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP HS 0.02 0.89 13.64 0.14% 6.12% 93.75%

Columbia 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP HS 0.03 5.5 12.66 0.16% 30.24% 69.60%

Columbia 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP HS 0.04 0.43 13.67 0.28% 3.04% 96.68%

Platte 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Sub bit ESP HS 0.03 3.8 9 0.23% 29.62% 70.15%

Platte 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Sub bit ESP HS 0.03 1.79 10.56 0.24% 14.46% 85.30%

Platte 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Sub bit ESP HS 0.03 4.41 11.69 0.19% 27.34% 72.47%

Presque Isle 9 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Sub bit ESP HS 0.046590909091 0.14909090909 7.0352272727 0.64% 2.06% 97.29%

Presque Isle 9 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Sub bit ESP HS 0.01 0.14909090909 7.2775 0.13% 2.00% 97.86%

Presque Isle 9 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Sub bit ESP HS 0.015 0.1025 6.7556818182 0.22% 1.49% 98.29%

Bin 14 Averages 0.19% 16.67% 83.14%

Bin 15 Boswell 2 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit BAGHOUSE 2.29 1.51 1.33 44.64% 29.43% 25.93%

Boswell 2 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit BAGHOUSE 1.58 1 1.16 42.25% 26.74% 31.02%

Boswell 2 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit BAGHOUSE 0.67 0.93 2.02 18.51% 25.69% 55.80%

Comanche 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit BAGHOUSE 1.70 2.95 4.61 18.36% 31.86% 49.78%

Comanche 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit BAGHOUSE 2.15 0.87 4.27 29.49% 11.93% 58.57%

Comanche 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit BAGHOUSE 4.69 0.69 3.01 55.90% 8.22% 35.88%

Bin 15 Averages 34.86% 22.31% 42.83%

Bin 16 Boswell 3 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 0.01 0.22 5.25 0.18% 4.01% 95.80%

Boswell 3 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 0.01 0.27 5.2 0.18% 4.93% 94.89%

Boswell 3 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 0.05 0.53 4.49 0.99% 10.45% 88.56%

Cholla 2 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 0.61 4.24 0.00% 12.58% 87.42%

Cholla 2 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 0.95 2.5 27.54% 0.00% 72.46%

Cholla 2 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 1.21 2.86 0.00% 29.73% 70.27%

Boswell 4 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 0.09 0.28 4.32 1.92% 5.97% 92.11%

OGCComment1v21. xls Page 2 PlantID RunNumber NewType FuelType NewPM SO2 Hg_ ParticleBoundIn Hg_ OxidizedIn Hg_ ElementalIn Percentage Split Units units ug/ dscm ug/ dscm ug/ dscm Boswell 4 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 2.62 0.94 1.29 54.02% 19.38% 26.60%

Boswell 4 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 2.41 0.48 1.02 61.64% 12.28% 26.09%

Colstrip 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 1.62 2.09 0.98 34.54% 44.56% 20.90%

Colstrip 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 1.77 2.16 5.8 18.19% 22.20% 59.61%

Colstrip 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 1.47 2.57 4.85 16.54% 28.91% 54.56%

Lawrence 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 0.18 1.32 3.99 3.28% 24.04% 72.68%

Lawrence 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 0.43 0.515 3.58 9.50% 11.38% 79.12%

Lawrence 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit PARTSCRUB 0.19 0.565 3.86 4.12% 12.24% 83.64%

Bin 16 Averages 15.51% 16.18% 68.31%

Bin 17 Blue only GRDA 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit/ bit SDAESP 0.22 3.83 6.73 GRDA 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit/ bit SDAESP 0.45 2.54 5.56 GRDA 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit/ bit SDAESP 1.0 7.71 3.26 Laramie 3 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDAESP 0.016 0.1368 0.3886 2.96% 25.27% 71.78%

Laramie 3 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDAESP 1.0417 0.3235 5.263 15.72% 4.88% 79.40%

Laramie 3 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDAESP 2.7544 0.2642 5.6211 31.88% 3.06% 65.06%

Wyodak 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDAESP 1.8 2.8 8.2 14.06% 21.88% 64.06%

Wyodak 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDAESP 2.2 3.4 6.8 17.74% 27.42% 54.84%

Wyodak 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDAESP 1.7 2.7 8.7 12.98% 20.61% 66.41%

Bin 17 Averages 15.89% 17.19% 66.93%

Bin 18 Craig 3 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDA 0.46 0.52 0.24 37.70% 42.62% 19.67%

Craig 3 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDA 0.75 0.41 0.23 53.96% 29.50% 16.55%

Craig 3 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDA 0.73 0.19 0.18 66.36% 17.27% 16.36%

Rawhide 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDA 0.22 1.22 11.01 1.77% 9.80% 88.43%

Rawhide 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDA 1.79 0.77 11.99 12.30% 5.29% 82.41%

Rawhide 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDA 3.22 0.39 12.65 19.80% 2.40% 77.80%

Sherburne 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDA 0.005 0.51 10.43 0.05% 4.66% 95.29%

Sherburne 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDA 0.005 0.22 10.56 0.05% 2.04% 97.91%

Sherburne 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit SDA 0.005 0.18 9.56 0.05% 1.85% 98.10%

Bin 18 Averages 21.34% 12.83% 65.84%

Bridger 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.04 2.1 4.4 Bridger 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.37 1.7 4.55 Bridger 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.06 1.5 3.66 Laramie 1 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.154 1.921 4.593 Laramie 1 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.023 1.3058 5.055 Laramie 1 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.01 1.866 4.562 Sam Seymour 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.02 2.02 6.12 Sam Seymour 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.005 3.07 4.83 Sam Seymour 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.005 3.9 8.66 Coronado 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Sub bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.025 0.88 1.95 Coronado 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Sub bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.025 0.76 1.73 Coronado 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Sub bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.025 1.03 1.77 Craig 1 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.03 0.25 2.74 Craig 1 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.03 0.22 1.93 Craig 1 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.03 0.12 1.47 San Juan 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.015 5.34 4.97 San Juan 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.07 2.88 3.71 San Juan 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit ESP HS WETSCRUB 0.025 4.61 3.29 Bin 21 Stanton 1 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Lignite ESP CS 0.105 0.099 7.34 1.39% 1.31% 97.30%

Stanton 1 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Lignite ESP CS 0.0415 0.08 6.83 0.60% 1.15% 98.25%

Stanton 1 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Lignite ESP CS 0.055 0.039 7.56 0.72% 0.51% 98.77%

Bin 21 Averages 0.90% 0.99% 98.11%

Bin 22 Lacygne 1 CYCLONE/ NOX/ WET Sub bit PARTSCRUB 5.81 3.46 1.13 55.87% 33.27% 10.87%

Lacygne 2 CYCLONE/ NOX/ WET Sub bit PARTSCRUB 5.69 2.91 0.52 62.39% 31.91% 5.70%

Lacygne 3 CYCLONE/ NOX/ WET Sub bit PARTSCRUB 5.12 0.505 0.52 83.32% 8.22% 8.46%

Bin 22 Averages 67.19% 24.47% 8.34%

Nelson 1 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Sub bit/ pet coke ESP HS 0.0224 0.45 2.95 Nelson 2 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Sub bit/ pet coke ESP HS 0.0167 0.22 2.03 Nelson 3 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Sub bit/ pet coke ESP HS 0.0191 0.11 1.97 Bin 24 Leland 1 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Lignite ESP CS 0.49 0.2 2.74 14.29% 5.83% 79.88%

Leland 2 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Lignite ESP CS 0.22 0.39 7.53 2.70% 4.79% 92.51%

Leland 3 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Lignite ESP CS Bin 24 Averages 8.49% 5.31% 86.19%

Stockton 1 FBC/ SNCR Bit  Pet Coke BAGHOUSE 2.737 0.068 0.067 OGCComment1v21. xls Page 3 PlantID RunNumber NewType FuelType NewPM SO2 Hg_ ParticleBoundIn Hg_ OxidizedIn Hg_ ElementalIn Percentage Split Units units ug/ dscm ug/ dscm ug/ dscm Stockton 2 FBC/ SNCR Bit  Pet Coke BAGHOUSE 1.506 0.0705 0.0695 Stockton 3 FBC/ SNCR Bit  Pet Coke BAGHOUSE 2.1 0.0655 0.074 Bin 27 Scrubgrass 1 FBC/ NONOX Waste bit BAGHOUSE 141.1 0.52 0.06 99.59% 0.37% 0.04%

Scrubgrass 2 FBC/ NONOX Waste bit BAGHOUSE 98.6 0.33 0.05 99.62% 0.33% 0.05%

Scrubgrass 3 FBC/ NONOX Waste bit BAGHOUSE 62.62 0.18 0.06 99.62% 0.29% 0.10%

Bin 27 Averages 99.61% 0.33% 0.06%

Bin 28 Heskett 1 FBC/ NONOX Lignite ESP CS 3.26 3.71 2.27 35.28% 40.15% 24.57%

Heskett 2 FBC/ NONOX Lignite ESP CS 2.02 0.66 1.8 45.09% 14.73% 40.18%

Heskett 3 FBC/ NONOX Lignite ESP CS 5.28 0.31 1.98 69.75% 4.10% 26.16%

Bin 28 Averages 50.04% 19.66% 30.30%

Bin 29 TNP 1 FBC/ NONOX Lignite BAGHOUSE 19 7.62 6.51 57.35% 23.00% 19.65%

TNP 2 FBC/ NONOX Lignite BAGHOUSE 9.23 3.91 5.28 50.11% 21.23% 28.66%

TNP 3 FBC/ NONOX Lignite BAGHOUSE 25.93 12.71 6.49 57.46% 28.16% 14.38%

Bin 29 Averages 54.97% 24.13% 20.90%

Bin 30 Kline 1 FBC/ NONOX Waste anthracite BAGHOUSE 46.02 0.06 0.47 98.86% 0.13% 1.01%

Kline 2 FBC/ NONOX Waste anthracite BAGHOUSE 44.56 0.03 0.41 99.02% 0.07% 0.91%

Kline 3 FBC/ NONOX Waste anthracite BAGHOUSE 47.22 0.03 0.36 99.18% 0.06% 0.76%

Bin 30 Averages 99.02% 0.09% 0.89%

Bin 31 Collier 1 STOKER/ NOX/ DRY Bit SDA 2.03 0.025 0.085 94.86% 1.17% 3.97%

Collier 2 STOKER/ NOX/ DRY Bit SDA 1.93 0.17 0.39 77.51% 6.83% 15.66%

Collier 3 STOKER/ NOX/ DRY Bit SDA 1.85 0.03 0.1 93.43% 1.52% 5.05%

Bin 31 Averages 88.60% 3.17% 8.23%

Bin 33 Bigbrown 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Lignite ESP CS/ BAGHOUSE 2.22 7.14 26.73 6.15% 19.78% 74.06%

Bigbrown 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Lignite ESP CS/ BAGHOUSE 0.47 9.1 23.97 1.40% 27.13% 71.47%

Bigbrown 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Lignite ESP CS/ BAGHOUSE 0.2 12.41 19.25 0.63% 38.95% 60.42%

Monticello 1 2 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Lignite ESP CS/ BAGHOUSE 15.44 21.79 8.53 33.74% 47.62% 18.64%

Monticello 1 2 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Lignite ESP CS/ BAGHOUSE 0.32 12.84 40.12 0.60% 24.10% 75.30%

Monticello 1 2 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Lignite ESP CS/ BAGHOUSE 6.02 17.18 33.39 10.64% 30.36% 59.00%

Bin 33 Averages 8.86% 31.32% 59.82%

Bin 34 Antelope 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Lignite SDA 0.065 0.33 6.76 0.91% 4.61% 94.48%

Antelope 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Lignite SDA 0.09 0.36 6.94 1.22% 4.87% 93.91%

Antelope 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Lignite SDA 0.14 0.14 6.81 1.97% 1.97% 96.05%

Stanton 10 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Lignite SDA 0.005 0.18 7.59 0.06% 2.32% 97.62%

Stanton 10 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Lignite SDA 0.002 0.26 7.13 0.03% 3.52% 96.46%

Stanton 10 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Lignite SDA 0.002 0.52 7.10 0.03% 6.82% 93.15%

Bin 34 Averages 0.70% 4.02% 95.28%

Bin 35 Lewis 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Lignite PARTSCRUB 1.05 15.1 10.68 3.91% 56.28% 39.81%

Lewis 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Lignite PARTSCRUB 1.55 12.58 7.77 7.08% 57.44% 35.48%

Lewis 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Lignite PARTSCRUB 1.3 5.79 9.41 7.88% 35.09% 57.03%

Bin 35 Averages 6.29% 49.60% 44.11%

Monticello 3 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Lignite ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.12 10.63 18.94 Monticello 3 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Lignite ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.07 12.74 18.14 Monticello 3 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Lignite ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.08 16.36 17.23 Reliant 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Lignite ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.01 18.97 10.78 Reliant 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Lignite ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.01 19.78 10.56 Reliant 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Lignite ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.02 22.68 11.37 Bailly 1 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Bit/ Pet Coke ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.036 2.92 2.41 Bailly 2 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Bit/ Pet Coke ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.05 1.95 2.65 Bailly 3 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Bit/ Pet Coke ESP CS WETSCRUB 0.06 2.76 2.22 Bin 37 Bayfront 1 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Bit MECH 0.52 0.53 1.48 20.55% 20.95% 58.50%

Bayfront 2 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Bit MECH 0.76 0.47 1.37 29.23% 18.08% 52.69%

Bayfront 3 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Bit MECH 0.06 0.51 1.16 3.47% 29.48% 67.05%

Bin 37 Averages 17.75% 22.84% 59.41%

Bin 39 Coyote 1 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Lignite SDA 0.49 1.15 9.73 4.31% 10.11% 85.58%

Coyote 2 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Lignite SDA 0.83 2.1 9.81 6.51% 16.48% 77.00%

Coyote 3 CYCLONE/ NONOX/ WET Lignite SDA 1.2 2.18 10.6 8.58% 15.59% 75.82%

Bin 39 Averages 6.47% 14.06% 79.47%

OGCComment1v21. xls Page 4 PlantID RunNumber NewType FuelType NewPM SO2 Hg_ ParticleBoundIn Hg_ OxidizedIn Hg_ ElementalIn Percentage Split Units units ug/ dscm ug/ dscm ug/ dscm AES 1 FBC/ SNCR Sub bit BAGHOUSE 0.19 0.028 0.79 AES 2 FBC/ SNCR Sub bit BAGHOUSE 0.25 0.12 0.94 AES 3 FBC/ SNCR Sub bit BAGHOUSE 0.26 0.077 0.72 Meramec 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit/ Bit ESP CS 6.08 0.39 0.20 Meramec 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit/ Bit ESP CS 7.36 1.07 0.35 Meramec 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Sub bit/ Bit ESP CS 4.57 1.56 0.5 St Clair 1 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit/ Bit ESP CS 1.91 1.73 1.49 St Clair 2 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit/ Bit ESP CS 2.2 1.63 1.07 St Clair 3 CONV/ PC/ NONOX/ DRY Sub bit/ Bit ESP CS 0.71 1.4 3.09 Clifty 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Sub bit/ Bit ESP HS 0.38 2.23 10.61 Clifty 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Sub bit/ Bit ESP HS 0.02 3.42 10.64 Clifty 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ WET Sub bit/ Bit ESP HS 0.005 3.28 11.01 Valley 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit  Pet Coke BAGHOUSE 0.03 1.15 0.97 Valley 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit  Pet Coke BAGHOUSE 0.04 1.19 0.36 Valley 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit  Pet Coke BAGHOUSE 0.03 0.98 0.54 Shawnee 1 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit/ sub BAGHOUSE 2.26 0.41 0.515 Shawnee 2 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit/ sub BAGHOUSE 2.14 0.7 0.47 Shawnee 3 CONV/ PC/ NOX/ DRY Bit/ sub BAGHOUSE 2.37 0.395 0.46 OGCComment1v21. xls Page 5 Mercury Speciation by Coal Rank Summary of Hg Emission Speciation by Single Fuel Inlet BIT Averages Control Particulate bound Hg Oxidized Hg ug/ dscm ug/ dscm Bin 1 Averages ESP CS 44.94% 44.61% Bin 4 Averages ESP HS 12.18% 48.54% Bin 5 Averages PARTSCRUB or SORBESP 2.32% 57.70% Bin 6 Averages FF 86.23% 5.42% Bin 7 Averages FF/ SDA 59.45% 29.46% Bin 31 Averages FF/ SDA 88.60% 3.17% Bin 37 Averages Multiclone 17.75% 22.84%

Average across speciation 44.49% 30.25%

SUB BIT Averages Bin 13 Averages ESP CS 5.81% 25.82% Bin 14 Averages ESP HS 0.19% 16.67% Bin 15 Averages FF 34.86% 22.31% Bin 16 Averages PARTSCRUB 15.51% 16.18% Bin 17 Averages ESP/ SDA 15.89% 17.19% Bin 18 Averages FF/ SDA 21.34% 12.83% Bin 22 Averages PARTSCRUB 67.19% 24.47%

Average across speciation 22.97% 19.35%

Lignite Averages Bin 21 Averages ESP CS 0.90% 0.99% Bin 24 Averages ESP CS 8.49% 5.31% Bin 28 Averages ESP CS 50.04% 19.66% Bin 29 Averages FF 54.97% 24.13% Bin 33 Averages ESP CS/ BAGHOUSE 8.86% 31.32% Bin 34 Averages FF/ SDA 0.70% 4.02% Bin 35 Averages PARTSCRUB 6.29% 49.60% Bin 39 Averages FF/ SDA 6.47% 14.06%

Average across speciation 17.09% 18.64%

Coal Refuse Averages Kline FF 99.02% 0.09% Scrubgrass FF 99.61% 0.33%

Average across speciation 99.31% 0.21%

Note this data analysis is a weighted percentage ( by test run) that is then averaged by species acros each coal rank. The data analyzed is from before the control device, on single APCD units only, not burning blended coal, and not equipped with SCRs or SNCRs. These restrictions were chosen to minimize potential factors that could effect mercury speciation. Also did not use GRDA data Page 6 Hg Speciation by fuel. xls Mercury Speciation by Coal Rank in Bin 17 but did use other units data.

Page 7 Hg Speciation by fuel. xls Mercury Speciation by Coal Rank Outlet Elemental Hg Particulate bound Hg Oxidized Hg Elemental Hg ug/ dscm ug/ dscm ug/ dscm ug/ dscm 10.45% 6.11% 68.19% 25.70% 39.28% 4.90% 57.84% 37.26% 39.98% 0.98% 43.30% 55.72% 8.35% 3.98% 62.58% 33.44% 11.09% 10.12% 38.14% 51.74% 8.23% 19.96% 17.94% 62.10% 59.41% 18.75% 42.74% 38.51%

25.26% 9.26% 47.25% 43.50%

68.37% 0.16% 30.83% 69.01% 83.14% 0.08% 11.72% 88.20% 42.83% 1.49% 82.83% 15.68% 68.31% 1.45% 5.11% 93.43% 66.93% 0.41% 1.47% 98.12% 65.84% 0.99% 4.35% 94.67% 8.34% 2.34% 5.75% 91.90%

57.68% 0.99% 20.29% 78.72%

98.11% 0.20% 3.62% 96.19% 86.19% 0.04% 16.99% 82.97% 30.30% 1.37% 11.64% 87.00% 20.90% 0.42% 71.18% 28.40% 59.82% 0.18% 64.49% 35.32% 95.28% 0.36% 12.62% 87.02% 44.11% 0.16% 2.98% 96.86% 79.47% 9.95% 17.07% 72.98%

64.27% 1.58% 25.07% 73.34%

0.89% 3.01% 37.30% 59.70% 0.06% 2.12% 38.81% 59.07%

0.48% 2.56% 38.06% 59.38%

oss Page 8 Hg Speciation by fuel. xls


D & Q Public Meeting Mary T. Smith, Director Engineering and Analysis Division January 26, 2005 What does EPA Need to Do Next?

 Organize internally ( OWM, OGWDW,

OECA, OGC, ORD, OPEI)

 FACA Charter  Approval by EPA's Deputy Adm.

 GSA review  Publish public notice of establishment in Federal Register  File Charter with Congressional Committees, Library of Congress, GSA More on Next Steps  EPA selects balanced set of FACA members, sends letters of invitation and obtains acceptances  Process design  Triangle interviews FACA members prior to first plenary meeting What is Likely to Happen Once the FACA is Established?

 Plenary meetings of FACA  Notice in Federal Register  Facilitated with a policy focus  Charge Technical Workgroup( s) and review their work  Likely to be 1 2 days each and face

toface  Likely 3 plenary meetings this CY  Move to a consensus More on FACA  First plenary meeting

May/ June

Likely work on process design, definitions,

descriptions of alternative approaches and criteria for evaluating alternatives, use and interpretation of MDL and ML in permitting process  Technical workgroup( s)

Charged with specific issues

Technical facilitator

Conducted by phone  Pilot consensus approach What Are Your Opportunities to Participate?

 FACA member  deadline for nominations is February 9, 2005

Email: smith. maryt@ epa. gov  FACA technical workgroup member  All meetings are open to the public  Comments to docket: OW 2004 0041  Contact EPA with input

Marion Kelly, kelly. marion@ epa. gov, 566 1045

Richard Reding, reding. richard@ epa. gov, 566

2237  Possible future rulemaking How Can I Stay Informed?

Website:

www. epa. gov/ waterscience/ methods

FACA charter

List of FACA members

Meeting dates and times

All Federal Register notices

Minutes of plenary meetings

Other updates, as appropriate Docket: OW 2004 0041,

www. epa. gov/ edocket Comments/ Questions?


 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES February 28, 2002 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Tolerance Review of Compounds of the Citric Acid Cycle (Kreb's Cycle) as Inert Ingredients in Terrestrial and/ or Aquatic Agricultural and Non Agricultural Uses FROM: Sid Abel, Senior Environmental Scientist Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507C)

TO: Kathryn Boyle, Inerts Team Lead Registration Division (7505C)

This memorandum transmits the Environmental Fate and Effects Division's (EFED) exposure and risk assessment of compounds of the Citric Acid Cycle (also known as the Kreb's Cycle). The assessment is based on readily available information from the Agency and peer reviewed public literature sources. Information contained in these sources permits EFED to conduct a qualitative assessment of environmental exposures and risks.

If you should have any questions concerning the information within, please contact me at 305 7346. Page 2 of 8 Conclusions A review of the readily available information on the compounds that make up the Citric Acid Cycle (also known as the Kreb's Cycle) is sufficient to conduct a qualitative assessment of the potential exposures and risks associated with their use as pesticide inert ingredients. Environmental loadings are attributable to natural (plants and animal materials) and anthropogenic (food additives, drugs, and related products) sources. Available data indicate that they rapidly dissociate in the aquatic environment at environmentally relevant pH's to the corresponding acid (anion) and its respective cation (H + ,Ca + ,K + ,Na + ,NH4 + ,Mg 2+ , among others). Anions of the respective compounds undergo aerobically mediated mineralization in days to weeks; mineralization is complete degradation to CO2 and water. Half lives are anticipated to be shorter. Under anaerobic conditions, the anions are expected to mineralize in a matter of weeks. These compounds are expected to be predominantly found in the non absorbed/ adsorbed state in aquatic environments based on fugacity modeling.

Photodegradation will also plays a role in the dissipation of the compounds, but, generally will occur at a lower rate, i. e., half lives may be longer than biodegradation. Mobility of the anions is expected to be high based on adsorption estimates, however, migration to ground water should be substantially mediated through their rapid biodegradation, volatilization, or through their uptake and utilization within plant cells. Runoff to surface is expected to dominate the nondegradation pathways of dissipation. Partitioning to air is expected to be low from water sources (based on the Henry's Law constant) and high from dryer surfaces such as soils (based on volatility). Bioconcentration is not expected to occur.

Shallow aquifer ground water concentrations of the anions of the citric acid cycle may reach low part per milligram (ppm) under conditions of exaggerated surface contamination (1 100 ppm) such as those observed beneath landfills and wood treatment facilities. However, they are generally found in the low parts per billion (ppb) elsewhere (< 100 ppb) some of which is attributable to natural sources (http:// toxnet. nlm. nih. gov). Surface water concentrations (fresh water and marine estuarine) have been reported to reach the low to mid ppb range (10 300 ppb). As with ground water occurrence, surface water concentrations can be attributed to natural sources as well. No data were available to determine the effects of drinking water treatment on concentrations of the anions at the consumer tap. Based on the strong oxidizing nature of the chlorination step of treatment utilities and the chemical structure of these compounds, it is unlikely that these compounds will be found in treated water at concentrations equivalent to those found in the environment. There are no ambient water quality criteria or drinking water maximum contaminant or health advisory levels for these compounds.

Based on the Agency's toxicity categories, as a group, these compounds would be classified as slightly toxic to practically non toxic to aquatic organisms. Terrestrial organism toxicity, using mammal data as a surrogate for the absence of avian data, indicate that these compounds would be classified as slightly toxic to practically non toxic except via the inhalation route where toxicity is significantly greater, one or more orders of magnitude greater depending Page 3 of 8 on the compound. At anticipated environmental concentrations, substances associated with the citric acid cycle are not expected to exceed the available toxicity data for both aquatic and terrestrial organisms to include exposures and risks via the inhalation route.

Introduction The compounds contained in this review are grouped together because of their close structural relationships, carboxylic acids and their salts, and the role each plays in cell metabolism, specifically in the tricarboxylic acid cycle (also known as the citric acid or Kreb's cycle). The compounds subject to this review are as follows: acetic acid, acetic acid ammonium salt, acetic acid calcium salt, acetic acid magnesium salt, acetic acid manganese salt, acetic acid potassium salt, acetic acid sodium salt, citric acid, citrate, citric acid sodium salt, citric acid sodium salts, fumaric acid and malic acid. These compounds are naturally occurring in foods and essential to normal metabolic processes.

Critic, fumaric and malic acid play key roles in the metabolic energy system called the Citric Acid Cycle or Kreb's Cycle. The cycle consists of a series of enzymatic chemical reactions occurring within the cell that are responsible for the final breakdown of food molecules to form carbon dioxide, water, and energy. Citric, fumaric, and malic acid are the integral components in this reaction, each being used over and over again to produce energy. They are not found in appreciable amount as waste products from animals as they play a key role in the acid base balance within animal systems. This process is active in all animals and higher plants and is carried out in the mitochondria (American Chemical Council, 2001).

Acetic Acid and its Salts The chemical structures, physical chemical properties, environmental fate behavior, and aquatic and terrestrial toxicity of these compounds are similar. Acetic acid and its salts undergo dissociation in aqueous media at pH's commonly found in the environment to the acetate anion and the respective cations. The toxicity of each compound is driven by acetate, with the cations playing a minor role. Table 1 provides key environmental physical chemical properties and fate data. Biodegradation appears to be the most significant removal mechanism following the dissociation of the compound into the acetate anion and respective salt. Data indicate that acetic acid and sodium acetate (acetic acid, sodium salt) photodegrade, although the rate is substantially slower than that of biodegradation. Fugacity modeling predicts 73% of any acetic acid released to the environment would partition to water based on solubility and partition coefficients, with the remainder partitioning into the air. Therefore, the data suggest that acetic acid and its salts are not persistent in the environment.

Ecotoxicity data for aquatic and terrestrial animals are available for four of the seven compounds, Table 1. The ecotoxicity data indicate that these compounds are slightly to practically nontoxic on an acute basis. The three remaining salts are closely related to the other salts in structure, properties and behavior and would be expected to have similar toxicity. Terrestrial Page 4 of 8 animal toxicity based on available mouse and rat data would indicate acetic acid is practically nontoxic on an acute basis and no chronic effects were observed in available studies.

Citric Acid and its Salts Citric acid and its salts are comprised of four compounds, which include citric acid, sodium citrate, tripotassium citrate, and trisodium citrate. The chemical structures and available data indicate that the physical chemical properties, environmental fate behavior, and aquatic and terrestrial toxicity of these four compounds are similar, Table 2. As in the case of the other acids and salts in this category, citric acid and its salts undergo dissociation in aqueous media into the citrate anion and the respective cations. The toxicity of each compound is driven by citrate, with the cations playing a minor role.

These compounds are highly water soluble and of moderate to low volatility. Data on the environmental fate of citric acid and its trisodium salt indicate that citric acid and its salts dissociate into their respective cations and the citrate anion, which is subsequently readily biodegraded. Studies indicate that citric acid and its trisodium salt are readily biodegraded (90 98% degradation after 48 hours). Fugacity modeling predicts that 100% of any citric acid released to the environment would partition to water based on solubility and partitioning coefficients. Therefore, the existing data indicates that citric acid and its salts are not persistent in the environment.

Aquatic toxicity data for fish, Daphnia and algae are available for citric acid and its trisodium salt and indicate that these compounds practically non toxic on an acute basis, with LC50 values ranging from 120 to >18, 000 mg/ L, Table 2. Terrestrial animal toxicity based on available mouse data would indicate citric acid is practically non toxic on an acute basis and no chronic effects were observed in available studies.

Fumaric Acid Available data indicate that fumaric acid is highly soluble in water and has low volatility. Fugacity modeling predicts that virtually all (99.8%) of any fumaric acid released to the environment would partition to water based on solubility and partitioning coefficients. Fumaric acid dissociates into fumate and hydrogen ion followed by fumate undergoing degradation by both biotic and abiotic mechanisms. Nearly complete biodegradation was observed after 21 days under aerobic conditions, Table 3. These data indicate that fumaric acid is not persistent in the environment.

Aquatic LC50 values for fish and Daphnia were greater than 200 mg/ L. The value for the more sensitive algae was 41 mg/ L. These data indicate that fumaric acid is slightly to practically non toxic to aquatic animals and plants on an acute basis. Terrestrial animal toxicity based on Page 5 of 8 available rat data would indicate fumaric acid is practically non toxic on an acute basis and no chronic effects were observed in available studies.

Malic Acid Malic acid is highly soluble in water and has a low volatility. Malic acid dissociates into malate and hydrogen ion and pH's commonly found in the aquatic environment. Malate is considered readily biodegradable in soil and water and fugacity modeling predicts that 100% of any malic acid released to the environment would partition to water based on solubility and partitioning coefficients, Table 3. Based on these data, malic acid is not likely to be persistent in the environment.

Data on the aquatic toxicity of malic acid to aquatic invertebrates are available. No data on toxicity to fish and algae were available. A 48 hour LC50 for Daphnia magna was 240 mg/ L, which classifies malic acid as practically non toxic to aquatic invertebrates on an acute basis. Given this data and the aquatic toxicity data for the structurally related compounds in this category, malic acid is likely to be practically non toxic to other aquatic species on an acute basis. Terrestrial animal toxicity based on available rat data would indicate malic acid is practically nontoxic on an acute basis and no chronic effects were observed in available studies.

References American Chemistry Council, 2001. U. S. High Production Volume (HPV) Chemical Challenge Program, Assessment Plan for Acetic Acid and Salts Category. Prepared by: American Chemistry Council, Acetic Acid and Salts Panel, June 28, 201.

TOXNET 2002. Online Scientific Search Engine, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health. Search results for Acetic Acid and salts, Citric Acid and salts, and Fumaric Acid.

U. S. EPA, 1992. Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED): Citric Acid Fact Sheet. Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. EPA 738 F 92 017. June 1992. Page 6 of 8 Table 1.

Chemical Properties of Acetic Acid and Salts Chemical Property Acetic Acid Acetic Acid, Ammonium salt Acetic Acid, Calcium salt Acetic Acid, Magnesium salt Acetic Acid, Manganese salt Acetic Acid, Potassium salt Acetic Acid, Sodium salt Vapor Pressure (mmHg)

11.4 @

20 o C 1.

4x10 4 @25 o C 14.7 @25 o C NA NA 7.

08x10 7 @25 o C 7.

08x10 7 @25 o C Log Kow 0.17 2.79 0.97 NA NA 3.72 3.72 Kd's (Koc)

0.

65 (228)

Clastic mud 0.085 (6.5) muddy sand 0.046 (27) carbonate sand NA NA NA NA NA NA Water Solubility (g/ L)

50 @20 o C 1,

480 @4 o C 430 @25 o C very solu ble soluble 2530g/ L @25 o C 365g/ L @20 o C pKa 4.

76 @25 o C NANANANANA NA Photodegradation 50% after 21 days NA NA NA NA NA 6.

6%

after 17h Biodegradation 99% after 7 days using AS days to weeks (SAR)

Readily biodegrades NA NA NA 100% after 5 days using AS Fish Acute Toxicity 96h LC50 )

75mg/ L (Lowest value

Bluegill sunfish)

238mg/ L (mosquito fish)

NA NA NA >6100mg/ L (rainbow trout)

100mg/ L (zebra fish) Daphnia Acute Toxicity 65mg/ L 48h EC50 )

NA NA NA NA 7170mg/ L 24h LC50 )

>1000mg/ L 48h EC50 ) Page 7 of 8 Algae Toxicity 4000mg/ L (8 day growth inhibition)

NA NA NA NA NA 2460mg/ L after 60 h growth inhibition) Mammal Acute Oral (LD50 )

4960 mg/ kg bw (mouse)

NA 4280mg/ kg bw (rat)

8610mg/ kg bw (rat)

3730mg/ kg bw (rat)

3250mg/ kg bw (rat)

3530mg/ kg bw (rat) AS:

Activated Sludge. SAR:

Structure Activity Relationship. NA: Not Available. Table 2.

Chemical Properties of Citric Acid and Salts Chemical Property Citric Acid Citric Acid,

Sodium salt Citric Acid,

Tripotassium salt Citric Acid,

Trisodium salt Vapor Pressure (mmHg@ 25 o C)

3.7x10 9 @25 o C NA NA 2.

09x10 12 @25 o C Log Kow 1.72 NA NA 0.28 Water Solubility (g/ L @25 o C)

1330g/ l @20 o C NA NA ~425g/ L @25 o C pKa pK1:

3.

13;

pK2: 4.76; pK3: 6.4 NA NA NA Photodegradation NA NA NA NA Biodegradation 98% after 48 h using domestic sewage NA NA 90% after 48 h using AS Fish Acute Toxicity (96h LC50 )

1516mg/ L (Bluegill sunfish)

NA NA >18000 32000mg/ L (guppy) Daphnia Acute Toxicity 120mg/ L (72h EC50 )

NA NA 5600

10000mg/ L (48h EC50 ) Algae Toxicity 640mg/ L 8

day growth inhibition)

NA NA >18000 32000mg/ L 96h EC50 ) Mammal Acute Oral 5790mg/ kg bw (mouse)

7100mg/ kg bw (mouse)

NA NA Page 8 of 8 Table 3.

Chemical Properties of Fumaric and Malic Acid Chemical Property Fumaric Acid Malic Acid Vapor Pressure (mmHg@ 25 o C)

1.54x10 4 4.6x10 6 Log Kow 0.33 @23 o C 1.26 Water Solubility (g/ L @25 o C)

7g/ L 592g/ L pKa pK1:

3.

02;

pK2: 4.46 @18 o C pK1:

3. 4;

pK2:

5.

05 Photodegradation 50%

degradation after 7.3h 50%

degradation after 2 days Biodegradation 98% after 21 days using domestic sewage readily biodegrades Fish Acute Toxicity 245mg/ L (48h LC50 zebrafish))

NA Daphnia Acute Toxicity 212 mg/ L (48h EC50 )

240mg/ L (48h EC50 ) Algae Toxicity 41mg/ L (72h EC50

green algae)

NA Rat Acute Oral 9300mg/ kg bw (female rat)

1600

3200mg/ kg bw (mouse, rat)


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 40 (Wednesday, March 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12440-12441]
[FR Doc No: 2021-04381]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1508-006.
    Applicants: Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy New Orleans, LLC
    Description: Informational Compliance Filing of Amended Power
Purchase Agreement [Pro Forma Sheets] of Entergy Louisiana, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 2/24/21.
    Accession Number: 20210224-5196.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/17/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1200-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Request for One-Time, Limited Waiver of Tariff
Provisions of Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Filed Date: 2/25/21.
    Accession Number: 20210225-5084.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/25/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1201-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original WMPA 5973; Queue
No. AG1-044 to be effective 1/26/2021.
    Filed Date: 2/25/21.
    Accession Number: 20210225-5002.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/18/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1202-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to Attachment A
Section 2.5 of the WEIS Tariff to be effective 4/27/2021.
    Filed Date: 2/25/21.
    Accession Number: 20210225-5050.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/18/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1203-000.
    Applicants: Birchwood Power Partners, L.P.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Cancellation entire tariff to be
effective 3/1/2021.
    Filed Date: 2/25/21.
    Accession Number: 20210225-5066.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/18/21.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: February 25, 2021.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-04381 Filed 3-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 22, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9435-9437]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03640]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0875; Project Identifier AD-2021-00675-E;
Amendment 39-21945; AD 2022-04-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Continental Aerospace Technologies,
Inc. and Continental Motors Reciprocating Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Continental Aerospace Technologies, Inc. C-125, C145, IO-360,
IO-470, IO-550, O-300, O-470, TSIO-360, TSIO-520 series model
reciprocating engines and certain Continental Motors IO-520 series
model reciprocating engines with a certain oil filter adapter
installed. This AD was prompted by reports of two accidents that were
the result of power loss due to oil starvation. This AD requires
replacing the oil filter adapter fiber gasket (fiber gasket) with an
oil filter adapter copper gasket (copper gasket). The FAA is issuing
this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective March 29, 2022.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 29,
2022.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Stratus Tool Technologies, LLC, 2208 Air Park Drive,
Burlington, NC 27215; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; website: https://www.tempestplus.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is
also available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0875.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0875; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, any
comments received, and other information. The address for Docket
Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George Hanlin, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Atlanta ACO, FAA, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA
30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Continental
Aerospace Technologies, Inc. (Type Certificate previously held by
Continental Motors, Inc., and Teledyne Continental Motors) C-125-1, C-
125-2, C145-2, C145-2H, IO-360-C, IO-360-D, IO-360-DB, IO-360-H, IO-
360-HB, IO-360-K, IO-360-KB, IO-470-E, IO-470-S, IO-550-B, IO-550-G, O-
300-B, O-300-C, O-300-D, O-300-E, O-470-A, O-470-B, O-470-G, O-470-J,
O-470-K, O-470-L, O-470-M, O-470-N, O-470-R, O-470-S, O-470-U, O-470-
11, O-470-15, TSIO-360-E, TSIO-360-EB, TSIO-360-F, TSIO-360-FB, TSIO-
360-GB, TSIO-360-LB, TSIO-360-MB, TSIO-360-SB, TSIO-520-C, TSIO-520-CE,
TSIO-520-E, TSIO-520-UB model reciprocating engines; and Continental
Motors (Type Certificate previously held by Teledyne Continental
Motors) IO-520-A, IO-520-B, IO-520-BA, IO-520-BB, IO-520-C, IO-520-D,
IO-520-J, and IO-520-L model reciprocating engines. The NPRM published
in the Federal Register on October 12, 2021 (86 FR 56658). The NPRM was
prompted by reports of two accidents that were the result of power loss
due to oil starvation. The first was a fatal accident on May 1, 2019,
in Mill Creek California, involving a Cessna 182P airplane with an
installed Continental Motors O-470-S engine. The National
Transportation Safety Board's preliminary accident investigation
report, docket number WPR19FA126, identified evidence of improperly
maintained or installed oil filter adapters. An improperly maintained
or installed oil filter adapter may lead to failure of the fiber
gasket, which may result in oil loss or oil starvation. Based on the
investigation, the manufacturer determined the need to replace the
fiber gasket with a copper gasket. In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to
require removal of the fiber gasket and replacement with a copper
gasket.

The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received comments from two individual commenters. The
following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's
response to each comment.

Request To Broaden the Scope

    One commenter compared the NPRM to a previous AD that the FAA
issued in 1996, AD 96-12-22 (61 FR 30501, June 17, 1996), to address
loose or separated oil filter adapters. The commenter requested that
the FAA consider issuing an AD with a broader scope, such as a remote-
mounted oil filter secured to the firewall, as a more permanent
solution. The commenter reasoned that a remote-mounted filter would
reduce the potential for accidents caused by oil starvation and power
loss.
    The FAA issued AD 96-12-22 to address an unsafe condition caused by
adapter-to-oil pump threads fragmenting, resulting in loose or
separated oil filter adapters. Like AD 96-12-22, a remote-mounted oil
filter secured to the firewall is not needed to correct the unsafe
condition prompting this AD, which is power loss due to oil starvation.
The unsafe condition that prompted this AD was caused by failure of the
fiber gasket due to improperly maintained or installed oil filter
adapters. Therefore, this AD requires replacing the fiber gasket with a
copper gasket.

Suggestion To Design a Better Gasket

    One commenter requested that the FAA make the manufacturer design a
better gasket, installed with a torque commensurate with the torqued
material, such as fiber gasket material similar to the gaskets used in
propeller governors. The commenter stated that the gaskets used in
propeller governors are manufactured with an oil-resistant outer layer,
a stainless steel mesh center layer, and an oil-resistant inner layer.
The commenter reasoned that these gaskets would cover the entire
sealing faces of the oil filter adapter and the oil pump, unlike the
copper gasket, which uses only a portion of the sealing area.
    The FAA does not agree that using fiber gasket material similar to
the gaskets used in propeller governors is necessary to address the
unsafe condition, which is power loss due to oil starvation. The unsafe
condition that prompted this AD was caused by failure of the fiber
gasket due to improperly maintained or installed oil filter adapters,
not the amount of torque applied to a specific gasket material.
Additionally, as part of the certification process, the manufacturer
has analyzed and tested the copper gasket and found it meets the design
intent.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered any comments
received, and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as
proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products. This AD is adopted as proposed in the
NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Stratus Tool Technologies Mandatory Service
Bulletin (MSB) SB-001 Rev B, dated June 17, 2021. This MSB specifies
procedures for removing a fiber gasket and replacing it with a copper
gasket. This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in ADDRESSES.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 6,300 engines installed on
airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace fiber gasket with copper        2.5 work-hours x $85 per             $34         $246.50      $1,552,950
 gasket.                                 hour = $212.50.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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:

2022-04-04 Continental Aerospace Technologies, Inc. and Continental

Motors: Amendment 39-21945; Docket No. FAA-2021-0875; Project
Identifier AD-2021-00675-E.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 29, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the reciprocating engine models identified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this AD with an F&M Enterprises, Inc.
(F&M) or Stratus Tool Technologies, LLC (Stratus) oil filter adapter
installed per Supplemental Type Certificate SE8409SW, SE09356SC, or
SE10348SC.
    (1) Continental Aerospace Technologies, Inc. (Type Certificate
previously held by Continental Motors, Inc., and Teledyne
Continental Motors) C-125-1, C-125-2, C145-2, C145-2H, IO-360-C, IO-
360-D, IO-360-DB, IO-360-H, IO-360-HB, IO-360-K, IO-360-KB, IO-470-
E, IO-470-S, IO-550-B, IO-550-G, O-300-B, O-300-C, O-300-D, O-300-E,
O-470-A, O-470-B, O-470-G, O-470-J, O-470-K, O-470-L, O-470-M, O-
470-N, O-470-R, O-470-S, O-470-U, O-470-11, O-470-15, TSIO-360-E,
TSIO-360-EB, TSIO-360-F, TSIO-360-FB, TSIO-360-GB, TSIO-360-LB,
TSIO-360-MB, TSIO-360-SB, TSIO-520-C, TSIO-520-CE, TSIO-520-E, and
TSIO-520-UB model reciprocating engines; and
    (2) Continental Motors (Type Certificate previously held by
Teledyne Continental Motors) IO-520-A, IO-520-B, IO-520-BA, IO-520-
BB, IO-520-C, IO-520-D, IO-520-J, and IO-520-L model reciprocating
engines.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 8550, Reciprocating
Engine Oil System.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of two accidents that were the
result of power loss due to oil starvation. The FAA is issuing this
AD to prevent loss of engine power. The unsafe condition, if not
addressed, could result in failure of the engine, in-flight
shutdown, and loss of control of the aircraft.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Before accumulating 50 flight hours after the effective date of
this AD or at the next scheduled oil change after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs first, remove any F&M or Stratus oil
filter adapter fiber gasket from service and replace it with a
Stratus AN900-28 or AN900-29 oil filter adapter copper gasket in
accordance with the Compliance Instructions, paragraph 6., pages 7
through 10 (including all detailed instructions for Figure 5 through
Figure 16), of Stratus Tool Technologies Mandatory Service Bulletin
SB-001 Rev B, dated June 17, 2021.

(h) Installation Prohibition

    After the effective date of this AD, do not install or reuse an
F&M or Stratus oil filter adapter fiber gasket in any F&M or Stratus
Tool Technologies oil filter adapter.

(i) Special Flight Permit

    A special flight permit may be issued in accordance with 14 CFR
21.197 and 21.199 to permit a one-time non-revenue ferry flight to
operate the airplane to a location where the maintenance action can
be performed.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact George Hanlin,
Aviation Safety Engineer, Atlanta ACO, FAA, 1701 Columbia Avenue,
College Park, GA 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email: [email protected].

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Stratus Tool Technologies Mandatory Service Bulletin SB-001
Rev B, dated June 17, 2021.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For Stratus Tool Technologies, LLC service information
identified in this AD, contact Stratus Tool Technologies, LLC, 2208
Air Park Drive, Burlington, NC 27215; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
website: https://www.tempestplus.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email: [email protected], or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on February 4, 2022.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-03640 Filed 2-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 133 (Thursday, July 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44791-44793]
[FR Doc No: 2023-14868]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1437-014.
    Applicants: Tampa Electric Company.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Southeast Region
of Tampa Electric Company.
    Filed Date: 6/30/23.
    Accession Number: 20230630-5450.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1595-017; ER10-1598-017; ER20-1641-004.
    Applicants: Southern Illinois Generation Company, LLC, Lincoln
Generating Facility, LLC, Crete Energy Venture, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Crete Energy Venture, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/30/23.
    Accession Number: 20230630-5456.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1915-012; ER10-1963-012; ER10-2638-012; ER10-
3274-004; ER10-3275-006; ER10-3278-004; ER18-213-004; ER20-2060-002;
ER22-284-001; ER23-1766-001; ER23-2113-001.
    Applicants: ETEM Remediation Two LLC, Boott Hydropower, LLC, MPH AL
Pierce, LLC, MPH Rockaway Peakers, LLC, Pittsfield Generating Company,
L. P., Forked River Power LLC, Capitol District Energy Center
Cogeneration Associates, Pawtucket Power Associates Limited
Partnership, Waterbury Generation, LLC, Jamaica Bay Peaking Facility,
LLC, Bayswater Peaking Facility, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Bayswater Peaking Facility, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5208.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2193-004.
    Applicants: H.Q. Energy Services (U.S.) Inc.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of H.Q. Energy Services (U.S.) Inc.
    Filed Date: 6/30/23.
    Accession Number: 20230630-5439.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2309-007; ER10-3058-005; ER10-3059-005; ER10-
3065-005; ER10-3066-005; ER22-296-002.
    Applicants: Jackson Generation, LLC, Edgewood Energy, LLC, Shoreham
Energy, LLC, Equus Power I, L.P., Pinelawn Power, LLC, Elwood Energy,
LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Elwood Energy, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5210.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2310-007; ER10-2311-007; ER10-2312-007; ER10-
2314-007; ER12-1195-006;

ER14-2486-004; ER15-595-004; ER15-924-004; ER15-926-004; ER15-927-004;
ER17-2580-003.
    Applicants: SEMASS Partnership, Covanta Plymouth Renewable Energy,
LLC, Covanta Niagara I, LLC, Covanta Haverhill Associates, LLC, Covanta
Fairfax, LLC, Covanta Union, LLC, Camden County Energy Recovery
Associates, L.P., Covanta Energy Marketing LLC, Covanta Hempstead
Company, Covanta Essex Company, Covanta Delaware Valley, L.P.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Covanta Delaware Valley, L.P., et al.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5202.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3194-009; ER10-3195-010; ER16-581-011; ER16-
2271-010; ER17-1370-010; ER20-1385-004; ER20-1853-003; ER21-1254-004;
ER21-1498-003; ER21-2204-004; ER22-210-002; ER22-1927-002; ER22-1928-
001; ER22-1929-002; ER22-1945-001.
    Applicants: Powells Creek Farm Solar, LLC, ENGIE Solidago Solar
LLC, Salt City Solar LLC, Sunnybrook Farm Solar, LLC, ENGIE 2020
ProjectCo-NH1 LLC, ENGIE Power & Gas LLC, Hawtree Creek Farm Solar,
LLC, Genbright LLC, Whitehorn Solar LLC, Bluestone Farm Solar, LLC,
ENGIE Energy Marketing NA, Inc., ENGIE Resources LLC, ENGIE Portfolio
Management, LLC, MATEP Limited Partnership, MATEP LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of MATEP LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5209.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3230-013; ER10-3239-013; ER10-3240-013; ER10-
3253-013; ER13-1485-013; ER14-1777-011; ER15-2722-009; ER18-1310-004;
ER18-2264-009; ER19-289-009; ER19-461-004; ER19-2462-007.
    Applicants: Macquarie Energy LLC, Wheelabrator Concord Company,
L.P., Cleco Cajun LLC, Macquarie Energy Trading LLC, Wheelabrator
Millbury Inc., Wheelabrator Saugus Inc., Wheelabrator Falls Inc.,
Wheelabrator Baltimore, L.P., Wheelabrator Bridgeport, L.P.,
Wheelabrator North Andover Inc., Wheelabrator Westchester, L.P.,
Wheelabrator Portsmouth Inc.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Wheelabrator Portsmouth Inc., et al.
    Filed Date: 6/30/23.
    Accession Number: 20230630-5440.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2508-028; ER19-1411-002; ER19-1414-004; ER19-
1415-004; ER19-1417-003; ER19-1865-002; ER19-1866-002; ER19-1867-002;
ER19-1868-002; ER19-1869-002; ER19-1870-002; ER19-1871-002; ER19-1872-
002; ER19-2140-003; ER19-2141-003; ER19-2142-003; ER19-2143-003; ER19-
2144-003; ER19-2145-003; ER19-2146-003; ER19-2147-003; ER19-2148-004;
ER20-1887-002; ER21-568-001; ER21-573-003; ER21-574-003; ER21-575-003;
ER21-577-003; ER21-578-003.
    Applicants: Morgantown Station, LLC, Morgantown Power, LLC, Lanyard
Power Marketing, LLC, Dickerson Power, LLC, Chalk Point Power, LLC,
Lanyard Power Holdings, LLC, Chalk Point Steam, LLC, Heritage Power
Marketing, LLC, Mountain Power, LLC, Warren Generation, LLC, Portland
Power, LLC, Sayreville Power, LLC, Gilbert Power, LLC, Brunot Island
Power, LLC, New Castle Power, LLC, Shawville Power, LLC, Tolna Power,
LLC, Titus Power, LLC, Shawnee Power, LLC, Orrtanna Power, LLC, Niles
Power, LLC, Hunterstown Power, LLC, Hamilton Power, LLC, Blossburg
Power, LLC, GenOn Power Midwest, LP, GenOn California South, LP, GenOn
REMA, LLC, GenOn Bowline, LLC, GenOn Energy Management, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of GenOn Energy Management, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5212.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3589-007.
    Applicants: Long Island Solar Farm, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Long Island Solar Farm, LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/30/23.
    Accession Number: 20230630-5447.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3642-022.
    Applicants: Tanner Street Generation, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Tanner Street Generation, LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5211.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-760-002; ER19-430-002; ER19-2644-002; ER22-
2483-001.
    Applicants: Alta Farms Wind Project II, LLC, Whitney Hill Wind
Power, LLC, Enel Green Power Hilltopper Wind, LLC, Canastota Windpower,
LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Canastota Windpower, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/30/23.
    Accession Number: 20230630-5441.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1667-006.
    Applicants: Battery Utility of Ohio, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Battery Utility of Ohio, LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/30/23.
    Accession Number: 20230630-5453.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-103-013; ER22-2144-004.
    Applicants: Invenergy Nelson Expansion LLC, Invenergy Nelson LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Invenergy Nelson LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/30/23.
    Accession Number: 20230630-5448.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-1019-009; ER15-356-016; ER15-357-016; ER19-
2250-007; ER22-1418-003; ER22-2703-001.
    Applicants: Pattern Energy Management Services LLC, Trailstone
Renewables, LLC, TrailStone Energy Marketing, LLC, Chief Keystone
Power, LLC, Chief Conemaugh Power, LLC, Fowler Ridge IV Wind Farm LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Fowler Ridge IV Wind Farm LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/30/23.
    Accession Number: 20230630-5452.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2226-005.
    Applicants: McHenry Battery Storage, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of McHenry Battery Storage, LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/30/23.
    Accession Number: 20230630-5455.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-140-012.
    Applicants: Lackawanna Energy Center LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Lackawanna Energy Center LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/30/23.
    Accession Number: 20230630-5449.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2418-009.
    Applicants: Great River Hydro, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Great River Hydro, LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5213.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-1795-002; ER19-1798-002; ER19-1793-002; ER19-
1797-002; ER19-1796-002;

ER19-1799-002; ER11-2036-015; ER18-2327-007; ER19-902-003; ER19-1597-
005; ER20-902-002; ER20-1593-005; ER20-1594-004; ER20-1596-005; ER20-
1597-005; ER20-1599-005; ER20-1620-003; ER21-2767-002; ER22-414-003;
ER22-1518-002; ER23-495-004; ER23-1631-001.
    Applicants: Cavalier Solar A, LLC,AES CE Solutions, LLC, Laurel
Mountain BESS, LLC, AES Marketing and Trading, LLC, Skipjack Solar
Center, LLC, AES Solutions Management, LLC, Richmond Spider Solar, LLC,
Pleinmont Solar 2, LLC, Pleinmont Solar 1, LLC, Highlander IA, LLC,
Highlander Solar Energy Station 1, LLC, sPower Energy Marketing, AES
Integrated Energy, LLC, Valcour Wind Energy, LLC, Riverhead Solar Farm,
LLC, AES Laurel Mountain, LLC, Valcour Wethersfield Windpark, LLC,
Valcour Chateaugay Windpark, LLC, Valcour Clinton Windpark, LLC,
Valcour Altona Windpark, LLC, Valcour Ellenburg Windpark, LLC, Valcour
Bliss Windpark, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of AES Laurel Mountain, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/28/23.
    Accession Number: 20230628-5199.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-879-004; ER20-1436-004; ER20-1437-004; ER20-
1438-004.
    Applicants: Energy Harbor Nuclear Generation LLC, Energy Harbor
Generation LLC, Energy Harbor LLC, Pleasants LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Pleasants LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/29/23.
    Accession Number: 20230629-5198.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/28/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2755-001; ER20-2276-002; ER22-1566-004.
    Applicants: Guernsey Power Station LLC, Moxie Freedom LLC,
Caithness Long Island, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Caithness Long Island, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/30/23.
    Accession Number: 20230630-5454.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-1373-002.
    Applicants: Hillcrest Solar I, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Northeast Region
of Hillcrest Solar I, LLC.
    Filed Date: 6/30/23.
    Accession Number: 20230630-5451.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/23.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: July 7, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-14868 Filed 7-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 14, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52676-52678]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24500]

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

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

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

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-1068; Product Identifier 2017-CE-034-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Intreprinderea De Constructii
Aeronautice Gliders

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Intreprinderea De Constructii Aeronautice Model IS-28B2 gliders. This
proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to
identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The
MCAI describes the unsafe condition as cracks at stringers in the rear
fuselage of several Model IS-28B2 gliders. We are issuing this proposed
AD to require actions to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 29,
2017.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Aeroclubul Romaniei, Bd.Lascar Catargiu, Nr.54, cod: 010673, Sector 1,
Bucharest, Romania; telephone: 011+40 021-312-36-19; fax: 011+40 021-
312-36-19; Internet: www.aeroclubulromaniei.ro; email:
www.aeroclubulromaniei.ro/contact/.
    You may review this referenced service information at the FAA,
Policy and Innovation Division, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri
64106. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1068; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments
will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Rutherford, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Standards Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas
City, Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2017-1068;
Product Identifier 2017-CE-034-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider
all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed
AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued AD
No.: 2016-0233, dated November 23, 2016 (referred to after this as
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for Intreprinderea De
Constructii Aeronautice Model IS-28B2 gliders. The MCAI states:

    Cracks were reportedly detected, located at stringers in the
rear fuselage of a number of IS-28B2 sailplanes. The subsequent
investigation attributed these cracks to induction of a pre-stress
during the manufacturing process of the affected parts.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to
reduced structural strength, possibly resulting in a loss of
structural integrity of the sailplane.
    To address this potentially unsafe condition, Aeroclubul
Romaniei (AR) issued Service Bulletin (SB) SB-IS-28B2-AR-01 to
provide inspection instructions. AR is currently developing
modification(s) to provide a design solution for the affected
sailplanes.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires
repetitive inspections of the structure of the rear fuselage and,
depending on findings, accomplishment of applicable corrective
action(s).
    This [EASA] AD is considered to be an interim action and further
AD action may follow.

Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Aeroclubul Romaniei has issued Aeroclubul Romaniei Service Bulletin
No.: SB-IS-28B2-AR-01, Revision 003, dated February 9, 2017 (ARSB No.
AR-01), and Aeroclubul Romaniei Service Bulletin No.: SB-IS-28B2-AR-02,
Revision 01, dated February 24, 2017 (ARSB No. AR-02). ARSB No. AR-01
describes procedures for inspection of the rear fuselage area to detect
any cracks, ruptures, or corrosion. ARSB No. AR-02 describes procedures
for installation of a modification to the upper stringer of the rear
fuselage. This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means

identified in the ADDRESSES section of this NPRM.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists
and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD will affect 30 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would take about 2 work-hours per
product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on
U.S. operators to be $5,100, or $170 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take about 15 work-hours and require parts costing $1,000, for a cost
of $2,275 per product. We have no way of determining the number of
products that may need these actions.

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to small airplanes, gliders, and
domestic business jet transport airplanes to the Director of the Policy
and Innovation Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) 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, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Intreprinderea De Constructii Aeronautice: Docket No. FAA-2017-1068;
Product Identifier 2017-CE-034-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 29, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Intreprinderea De Constructii Aeronautice IS-
28B2 gliders, all serial numbers, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 53: Fuselage.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as cracks at
stringers in the rear fuselage of several Model IS-28B2 gliders. We
are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracks, which could lead
to reduced structural strength resulting in loss of structural
integrity and loss of control.

(f) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the following actions in paragraphs
(f)(1) and (2):
    (1) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD and
repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 50 hours time-in-
service (TIS), inspect the rear fuselage structure following the
instructions in Aeroclubul Romaniei Service Bulletin (SB) No.: SB-
IS-28B2-AR-01, Revision 003, dated February 9, 2017.
    (2) If any crack or corrosion is detected during any inspection
required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, before further flight,
modify the rear fuselage structure following the instructions in
Aeroclubul Romaniei SB No.: SB-IS-28B2-AR-02, Revision 01, dated
February 24, 2017.
    (3) Completion of the modification to the rear fuselage
structure as required in paragraph (f)(2) of this AD terminates the
repetitive inspections required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD.

(g) Reporting Requirement

    Although Aeroclubul Romaniei SB No.: SB-IS-28B2-AR-01, Revision
003, dated February 9, 2017, specifies to submit certain information
to the manufacturer, this AD does not require that action.

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Small Airplane Standards Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. Send information to ATTN: Jim Rutherford, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Standards Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas
City, Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (816) 329-
4090; email: [email protected]. Before using any approved AMOC
on any glider to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate
principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office
(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved

by the Manager, Small Airplane Standards Branch, FAA; or the
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).

(i) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI AD No.: 2016-0233, dated November 23, 2016;
Aeroclubul Romaniei Service Bulletin No.: SB-IS-28B2-AR-01, Revision
003, dated February 9, 2017, and Aeroclubul Romaniei Service
Bulletin No.: SB-IS-28B2-AR-02, Revision 01, dated February 24,
2017. You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2017-1068. For service information related to this AD, contact
Aeroclubul Romaniei, Bd.Lascar Catargiu, Nr.54, cod: 010673, Sector
1, Bucharest, Romania; telephone: 011+40 021-312-36-19; fax: 011+40
021-312-36-19; Internet: www.aeroclubulromaniei.ro; email:
www.aeroclubulromaniei.ro/contact/. You may review this referenced
service information at the FAA, Policy and Innovation Division, 901
Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on November 3, 2017.
Melvin J. Johnson,
Acting Deputy Director, Policy & Innovation Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-24500 Filed 11-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


MEMORANDUM

To:	Margaret Sheppard , U.S. EPA

From:	Emily Herzog, Veronica Kennedy, Marian Van Pelt, and Mark Wagner,
ICF International

Date:	September 13, 2010

Re:	Summary of Updates to the Vintaging Model that Impacted HFO-1234yf
Emissions Estimates (Deliverable under EPA Contract Number EP-W-06-008
Task Order 038, Task 01)

This memorandum summarizes the updates made to the Vintaging Model (VM)
that impacted the HFO-1234yf emissions estimates used in the August 2009
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0664-0037] and May 2010 versions of the revised
Assessment of the Potential Impacts of HFO-1234yf and the Associated
Production of TFA on Aquatic Communities and Local Air Quality (referred
to below as the ”TFA Assessment”).  The emissions estimates used in
the revised versions of the TFA Assessment varied slightly, as
summarized in   REF _Ref270679435 \h  \* MERGEFORMAT  Table 1  below.

Table   SEQ Table \* ARABIC  1 : HFO-1234yf Emissions Estimates from the
2009 and 2010 TFA Assessments (Metric Tons)

Scenarios	2020	2030	2040	2050

Scenario 1- MVAC  (2009)a	6,244	28,327	33,196	36,478

Scenario 1- MVAC (2010)b	6,244	28,327	33,093	35,851

% change	0.0%	0.0%	-0.3%	-1.7%

Refrigeration (2009)a	3,484	12,261	18,216	23,379

Refrigeration (2010)b	3,636	12,748	18,046	20,318

% change	4.4%	4.0%	-0.9%	-13.1%

Stationary AC (2009)a	617	2,212	3,936	4,467

Stationary AC (2010)b	620	2,221	3,931	4,447

% change	0.6%	0.4%	-0.1%	-0.4%

Scenario 2 – Sum of All Ref/AC (2009)a	10,345	42,800	55,349	64,324

Scenario 2 - Sum of All Ref/AC (2010)b	10,501	43,296	55,070	60,616

% change	1.5%	1.2%	-0.5%	-5.8%

a ICF projected emissions of HFO-1234yf using special scenarios designed
specifically for the August 4, 2009 analysis and run on the U.S. EPA
Vintaging Model, Version VM IO File v4.1 5-19-09.

b ICF projected emissions of HFO-1234yf using special scenarios designed
specifically for the May 25, 2010 analysis and run on the U.S. EPA
Vintaging Model, Version VM IO File v4.4_12-16-09.

The scenarios described in Table 1 are in reference to the scenarios
identified in both the August 2009 and May 2010 versions of the TFA
Assessment.  Scenario 1 and scenario 2 are defined as follows:

Scenario 1: HFO-1234yf is used in the United States as a new car
refrigerant in the MVAC sector.  HFO-1234yf begins penetrating the
market in 2016 reaching 100 percent market penetration by 2020.

Scenario 2: HFO-1234yf is used in the United States as a new car
refrigerant in MVAC systems, refrigeration, and stationary AC systems.
Similar to scenario 1, by 2020, HFO-1234yf is used in all new MVAC
systems. For refrigeration and stationary AC systems, HFO-1234yf enters
the market in 2010, reaches 30 percent penetration of the market in
2015, and 100 percent by 2020.

Refrigeration systems include equipment used in all refrigeration end
uses, such as household refrigerators and freezers, retail food
refrigeration, cold storage warehouses, and vending machines.
Stationary AC systems include equipment used in all air conditioning end
uses for stationary equipment, such as chillers, residential air
conditioning and heat pumps, and dehumidifiers.

Factors that Contributed to a Change in Emissions Estimates

Overall, changes from the 2009 estimates to the 2010 estimates were
relatively small, equaling less than 6% for all Ref/AC end-uses combined
for all projected years. The change is driven primarily by changes in
the growth rate assumed for the refrigeration end-uses. Specifically,
the updates that were made to the Vintaging Model that contributed to
this change were as follows:

For all Ref/AC end-use sectors, the annual growth estimates from
2031-2050 were updated to assume a blanket growth rate of 0.8% based on
population projection growth from the Census Bureau.  Previously, the
post-2030 growth rates were projected from the growth rates from
2010-2030.  This change had the most significant impact on the
refrigeration end-use sector due to the previously assumed average
growth rate of roughly 2.4% for all end-uses within the sector.

In addition to the VM updates, for the refrigeration and stationary AC
end-uses, the market penetration assumptions were modeled differed
slightly:

In the 2009 version of the TFA Assessment, HFO-1234yf penetrates 30% of
the market from 2010 to 2015 in a linear transition.

In contrast, in the 2010 version of the TFA Assessment, the transition
takes two steps.  First HFO-1234yf penetrates 6% of the market
instantaneously in 2010.  Then, another 24% transitions linearly from
2011-2015, totaling 30% market penetration by 2015.

While the text in the 2009 version of the report indicates that the same
assumptions were used in both versions of the report, a closer look at
the model run uncovered this minor discrepancy.  As a result, the
emission estimates for years prior to 2035 for the refrigeration and
stationary AC end-use sectors are slightly higher (<5%) in the 2010
version of the TFA Assessment.  This minor difference had no impact on
emissions estimates post-2040 and therefore had no significant impact on
the outcome of the analysis.

Generally, the Vintaging Model is routinely updated to modify any of the
100+ end-uses as new data are available or new research is conducted
into end-uses.  Modeled parameters that could change for a given end-use
include growth rates, leak, service, and disposal rates, substitution
patterns, charge sizes, lifetime, and market size.  To perform off-line
analyses such as the TFA assessment, ICF builds from the version of the
Vintaging Model that was used for the most recent US Greenhouse Gas
Emission Inventory.  This Inventory version of the model is updated
annually and takes into account the years’ worth of model
improvements.

Please contact Mark Wagner at<PHONE_NUMBER> with any questions or
comments.

-   PAGE   \* MERGEFORMAT  2  -