                 EPA ICR No. 2450.01; OMB Control No. 2070-NEW

                                        ATTACHMENT B

Design for the Environment Safer Product Labeling Program  Partner of the Year Application Form

                                            Design for the Environment (DfE)  Safer Product Labeling Program Partner of the Year Awards                                Instructions for Application Form                                                       EPA developed The Partner of the Year Awards to recognize DfE stakeholders who have furthered the safer chemistry goals of the DfE Safer Product Labeling Program through their active and exemplary participation in and promotion of the program.  Making DfE's mission known to the widest possible audience, through its safer product label and in other forms of communication, is critical to fully realizing the program's goals of protecting human health and the environment, promoting a sustainable economy, and creating green jobs, especially in the small business sector.  DfE anticipates that selecting the Partner of the Year will be a challenging task.  Applicants with outstanding applications that do not win the Partner award may receive an honorable mention.

The Partner of the Year Awards will be an annual event, with recognition for DfE stakeholder organizations from five broad categories:  (1) Formulators/Product Manufacturers (of both consumer and Institutional/Industrial (I/I) products), (2) Purchasers and Distributors, (3) Retailers, (4) Supporters (e.g., non-governmental organizations, including environmental and health advocates, trade associations, academia, sports teams, and others), and (5) Innovators (e.g., chemical manufacturers, technology developers, and others).  Within these categories, DfE may elect to give an additional award in the subcategories of "small business" and "sustained excellence."  Organizations that wish to apply in more than one award category must complete individual application packages.

To be eligible for recognition, candidates should complete this application and have it signed by an appropriate company or organization official (e.g., CEO or vice president for government relations ).

EPA reserves the right to request at any time additional documentation to confirm that candidates have achieved the criteria for recognition.  If documentation is requested but not received within a reasonable time (e.g., X days), EPA may deny or withdraw recognition.

Application Process: The application is available online and may be filled out and submitted in hard copy by mail, faxed, or scanned and emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS> All applications received will be considered public information and no materials submitted will be returned. If you choose to send the application electronically, the application and signed signature page must be scanned and sent to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To be eligible for the awards, which may be announced as soon as fall 2012, candidates would need to submit their application by summer 2012 [date to be determined].

Supplemental documents such as photos, pamphlets, copies of advertisements, videos, audio files, etc. may be sent with your application as PDF files (each file must be less than 12MB).  If necessary, you can mail hard copies of supplemental material to the following address maintained by our contractor (EPA Contract No. XXXXXXXXX):

Design for the Environment Safer Product Labeling Program Partner of the Year Awards c/o Abt Associates Inc. Attn: Aviva Loew 4550 Montgomery Avenue, Suite 800 North Bethesda, MD 20814-5341 P:<PHONE_NUMBER> F:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Confirmation of Receipt: You will receive an email within one week confirming any materials you submit.  It will be sent to the Primary Communications contact in the award application.  If you do not receive confirmation within one week, please contact the DfE Partner Awards lead, Bridget Williams, at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Notification:  You may be notified as soon as  early fall 2012 of the status of your application.

Questions: Questions about eligibility, nomination procedures, or Design for the Environment should be directed to Bridget Williams of EPA's Design for the Environment Program at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Paperwork Burden Estimate     The public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 15 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering information, and reviewing and completing the application.  An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 2070-xxxx. Approval expires on DATE.    Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460.  Include the OMB control number in any correspondence.  Do not send the completed application to this address.           Design for Environment

SECTION 1a: Enter requested information for the authorized representative

Organization Name

Contact Name

Address

City, State, Zip

Phone Fax

Email

Website

SECTION 1b: Indicate your type of organization

Formulators/Product Manufacturers  -  both Consumer and Industrial/Institutional (Complete items 1-5 in Section 2)

Purchasers and Distributors (Complete items 3-5 in Section 2)

Retailers (Complete items 3-5 in Section 2)

Supporters  -  e.g. non-governmental organizations, including environmental and health advocates, trade associations, academia, sports teams, and others who promote DfE and the development and use of safer product formulations (Complete items 3-5 in Section 2)

Innovators  -  e.g., chemical manufacturers, technology developers, and others who create innovative ways to advance the goals of the DfE Safer Product Labeling Program (Complete items 4-5 in Section 2)

SECTION 1c:   Indicate whether your organization is a small business.  To qualify as a small business, your business must meet the criteria in the Regulatory Flexibility Act / Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (RFA/SBREFA)[1]

Yes

No

[1]For more information, please visit the RFA/SBREFA website at http://www.epa.gov/sbrefa/ SECTION 2:

As part of its environmental mission, the DfE Safer Product Labeling Program partners with businesses and others to reduce health and environmental risks by advancing the manufacture and use of safer products and technologies.  Toward this end, DfE increases awareness of the toxicological properties of chemicals through the replacement of chemicals of potential concern with safer alternatives.   DfE allows the use of its logo on products that perform well and contain the safest possible ingredients, as determined by expert evaluation of the best available science.  DfE recognition represents the highest level of achievement in formulating products that are safer for families and the environment.

Making DfE's mission known to the widest possible audience is key to fully realizing the program's goals and potential.  The purpose of the Partner of the Year award is to recognize stakeholders who have made exceptional contributions to advancing DfE's mission.

Evaluation criteria: Criteria for evaluating applications for this award are listed below.  In addition, each applicant will be screened to determine their history of civil or criminal EPA enforcement actions.  Results of this screening will be factored into the winner selection process.

Please describe your company's or organization's activities and accomplishments in furthering DfE's mission.  Your narrative should:          *        Be no more than three pages, but may be accompanied by samples of specific promotions, advertisements, or other activities your organization.           *        Describe your company's or organization's recent activities and accomplishments in as much detail as possible.          *        Cumulative accomplishment statements may be included in the Accomplishments Narrative, but data specific to the past year's activities must be highlighted. When discussing cumulative accomplishments, ensure that you include a time frame (e.g., reduced the use of chemicals of concern by 100,000 pounds in 2011, and more than 3,000,000 pounds since 2003).            *        Use the information elements in the listed in the table below to guide development of your narrative.

Tips for Success: There are a few steps you can take to ensure a successful application.     * Partner of the Year Awards are based on activities that increase awareness of the DfE Safer Product Labeling Program, DfE-labeled products, and the program's mission to help safeguard human and environment health through safer chemistry.  While general education on the importance of safer chemicals is valued, your application should focus on your specific activities and accomplishments to promote the use of DfE-labeled products and your actions to advance the program.     * Be sure to provide measurable results in your written statement -- e.g., number of DfE - labeled products sold, people reached, advertisements run, signs posted, newsletters distributed, etc.

        In your Accomplishments Narrative, address the questions appropriate to your organization type:

Formulators/Product Manufacturers Complete items 1-5 1. Participation in the DfE Safer Product Labeling Program (Applicants must address each of the following items.)	                *        Number of DfE-labeled products and percentage change over previous year. 	                *        Percentage of product line that is DfE-labeled and percentage change over previous year.                 *        Percentage of total sales that were DfE-labeled and percentage change over previous year.                 *         Information on leadership in DfE-labeled products, including a brief description of any safer chemistry innovations in the product design (e.g., use of a green-chemistry-award-winning ingredient or chemistry that furthers other environmental goals like energy efficiency).          2.  Use of the DfE Label             *        Confirm that the DfE logo is used appropriately on products, packaging, website and other materials (N.B., the logo must appear with the DfE tag line and web address. Consult the DfE Welcome Handbook for guidance on proper logo use.)             *        Indicate the percentage of DfE - recognized products that carry the DfE logo and the location of the logo on containers (front, back or cap).             *        Provide information on labeling that goes beyond the basic requirements, for example, unique or prominent use of the DfE logo on products or packaging.             *        Provide examples or pictures to illustrate DfE logo use.

3. Promotion and Use of DfE-labeled Products        *        Describe your efforts to promote or use DfE-labeled products;  examples include: featuring DfE in exhibits at industry tradeshows, presentations and other communications; using DfE-labeled products to clean homes, stores and facilities; and, advocating for use of labeled products.        *        Indicate if you have led or participated in cooperative promotions of the DfE label, such as in-store or web-based notices or advertising.       *        For each significant promotion or use, include information on the role of participants and the duration, reach, and outcomes.        *        Submit examples of print, radio, television, or direct-mail advertising, as appropriate.

4. Communications on DfE to Consumers and End-Users        *        Describe your DfE-themed outreach or advocacy activities and messaging; for example, public relations efforts, special events, press releases, etc.       *        Submit good examples of outreach and advocacy efforts; for example, brochures with DfE messages and logo; incorporation of DfE logo and messaging on company website; development of technology or computer application that educates the public on and promotes the use of safer products or environmental messaging in general.       * Include information on audience, frequency, and reach, and pictorial examples like Web shots or ads.

5.  Innovations in Safer Chemistry and Other Efforts to Advance DfE and Environmental Protection        *        Describe your efforts/successes in developing safer chemicals for use in DfE-labeled products (include number of chemicals in Cleangredients database or used in DfE - labeled products).       *        Discuss your leadership of or participation in activities related to new or existing DfE projects (beyond safer product labeling).       *        Provide examples of your organization's commitment to chemical-risk-reduction activities or other environmental and health protection/stewardship initiatives.

Purchasers and Distributors; Retailers Complete items 3-5

Supporters; Innovators Complete items 4-5

SECTION 3: Certification of Application Please have the appropriate company or organization official (e.g., CEO, vice president for government affairs, division head, or other authorized signatory) sign here to verify the accuracy of the application.

Signature of Authorizing Entity Date Printed Name and Title Date

 I hereby affirm that the contents of this application are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge, and that I am a representative of the company or organization named above and am duly authorized to sign on its behalf.


NCS Herald Cohort Study Instrument # 24 Partner Questionnaire Six Month Home Visit Eligibility: All partners of women who gave birth Mode of administration: Interviewer, home visit 8/ 4/ 2005 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 20 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Dr. Pauline Mendola, US EPA, MD 58A, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. E mail: mendola. pauline@ epa. gov. Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

1 PRELOADED DATA:

Today's date Language of interview ( English/ Spanish)

Female Name Female Address and Phone Spouse/ Partner's Name Spouse/ Partner's Address and Phone Marital status Occupation Chemical exposures Student status QUESTIONNAIRE: Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

2 Address ( update)

1. I'd just like to quickly confirm the contact information we have on file: { FILL PRELOADED ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER}. Is this still correct?

1 YES 2 NO

Enter correct information { END OF ADDRESS MODULE} Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

3 Occupation ( Update)

1. In your last interview on [ FILL DATE], you reported that you were ( FILL: not a / a full time / a parttime student. Is this still correct?

1 YES

SKIP TO Q4 2 NO 2.. Are you now a student full or part time?

1 YES, FULL TIME 2 YES, PART TIME 3 NO, NOT A STUDENT

SKIP TO Q4 3. What type of school are you currently attending?

1 HIGH SCHOOL 2 TECHNICAL SCHOOL 3 COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY 4 GRADUATE SCHOOL 5 PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL ( FOR EXAMPLE, MEDICAL SCHOOL) 6 OTHER ( SPECIFY)_________________

4. In your last interview on [ FILL DATE], you reported that you were ( FILL EMPLOYMENT). Is this still correct?

1 YES 2 NO

SKIP TO Q5 Q4= YES, STILL WORKING

SKIP TO Q6 Q4= YES, STILL LOOKING FOR WORK

GO TO NEXT MODULE Q4= YES, STILL NOT WORKING

GO TO NEXT MODULE 5. Are you currently

[ ONLY DISPLAY THE OPTIONS NOT SELECTED IN PREVIOUS INTERVIEW] 1 Working at a job or business, SKIP TO PARAGRAPH BEFORE Q7 2 Looking for work, or GO TO NEXT MODULE 3 Not working at a job or business? GO TO NEXT MODULE 6. Did you start work at any jobs since [ FILL DATE]?

1 YES 2 NO

GO TO NEXT MODULE Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

4 Please tell me about the jobs you've had since your last interview, starting with the ( FILL: current/ most recent/ next) one.

7. On what date did you start this job?

MM/ DD/ YYYY 8. On what date did you stop working at this job?

MM/ DD/ YYYY 1 = STILL EMPLOYED 9. What kind of business or industry ( FILL: is/ was) this? ( For example: TV and radio management, retail shoe store, state labor department, farm.)

_________________________________ ENTER NAME OF BUSINESS, JOB, OR INDUSTRY 10. What kind of work ( FILL: are/ were) you doing? ( For example: farming, mail clerk, computer specialist.)

_________________________________ ENTER NAME OF OCCUPATION 11. How many hours a week ( FILL: do/ did) you usually work at this job?

____ HOURS 12. ( FILL: Do/ Did) you do shift work for this job?

1 YES 2 NO

SKIP TO Q14 13. ( FILL: Does/ Did) this include the night shift?

1 YES 2 NO 14. Did you have any other jobs since [ FILL DATE]?

1 YES [ REPEAT Q67 Q13 FOR UP TO 3 JOBS] 2 NO

GO TO NEXT MODULE { END OF OCCUPATION MODULE} Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

5 Chemical Exposures ( Update)

Now I'm going to ask you about chemicals you may have used at work, at home, or for any hobbies.

1. Last time you said you were { FILL: not exposed to any of these chemicals / exposed to [ DISPLAY LIST OF EXPOSURES REPORTED IN PREVIOUS VISIT]}. Is this still correct? ( HAND SHOW CARD TO RESPONDENT AND READ THE LETTER CORRESPONDING TO EACH PREVIOUS EXPOSURE)

1 YES

IF NO PREVIOUS EXPOSURES, SKIP TO END 2 NO 2. [ IF Q1= 1, ASK:] Are you currently also exposed to any of the following chemicals? [ IF Q1= 2, ASK:] Which of the following chemicals are you currently exposed to?

[ IF Q1= 1, DISPLAY ONLY THOSE EXPOSURES NOT PREVIOUSLY REPORTED. IF Q1= 2, DISPLAY ALL EXPOSURES]

YES NO

SKIP TO NEXT EXPOSURE 3. How often are you exposed to [ INSERT EXPOSURE] ? Would you say. . .

4. Did the exposure occur while you were at work?

2. Currently Exposed Yes = 01 No = 02 3. Frequency 1 = Daily 2 = 2 3/ week 3 = 1/ week 4 = 1/ month 5 = < 1/ month 4. At work Yes = 01 No = 02 A. Fuels, solvents, dry cleaning fluids, degreasers, or adhesives B. Lead, including paints with lead in them C. Fumes or gases ( e. g., nitrous oxide, ethylene oxide, anesthetic gases) D. Radiation ( e. g., fluoroscopy, radioisotopes, highintensity microwaves, x rays) E. Mercury F. Metal fumes or particles G. Pesticides that you've mixed or applied H. Paints, strippers, or varnishes I. Hair and nail products ( e. g, hair dye, bleach, hair relaxer, nail polish and remover) J. Cleaning products ( e. g., oven cleaner, disinfectant, carpet cleaner, bleach) K. Carbon black from copying machines L. Coal or coal products from hot asphalt, tar, or roofing material { END OF CHEMICAL EXPOSURES MODULE} Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

6 Activity ( Full)

Now I am going to ask you some questions about physical activities you might do at work, at home, for recreation, and about activities involving child or adult care. I want you to tell me about activities you did in the past month that caused at least some increase in breathing and heart rate.

1. In the past month, did you  2. IF YES: On average over the past month, how many times did you do these activities? Would you say  3. Thinking about your breathing and heart rate, how hard did this usually feel to you? Did it feel  ( HAND SHOW CARD TO RESPONDENT) A. [ SKIP IF NOT CURRENTLY EMPLOYED] participate in any work activities, such as walking, lifting, or carrying objects or people, that caused at least some increase in breathing and heart rate? 1 = Daily, 2 = 2 to 3 times per week, 3 = Once a week, or 4 = Once a month? FH SH H B. participate in any non work, recreational activity or exercise, such as walking for exercise, swimming, or dancing, that caused at least some increase in breathing and heart rate? 1 = Daily, 2 = 2 to 3 times per week, 3 = Once a week, or 4 = Once a month? FH SH H C. participate in any outdoor household activities, such as gardening, mowing, or raking, [ that caused at least some increase in breathing and heart rate]? 1 = Daily, 2 = 2 to 3 times per week, 3 = Once a week, or 4 = Once a month? FH SH H D. participate in any indoor household activities, such as scrubbing floors, mopping, laundry, or vacuuming, [ that caused at least some increase in breathing and heart rate]? 1 = Daily, 2 = 2 to 3 times per week, 3 = Once a week, or 4 = Once a month? FH SH H E. participate in any child or adult care activities that caused at least some increase in breathing and heart rate? These would be activities such as playing with children, pushing a stroller or wheelchair, carrying, or lifting a child or adult. 1 = Daily, 2 = 2 to 3 times per week, 3 = Once a week, or 4 = Once a month? FH SH H F. walk for transportation, such as to work or to the store, and that walking caused at least some increase in breathing and heart rate? 1 = Daily, 2 = 2 to 3 times per week, 3 = Once a week, or 4 = Once a month? FH SH H G. bike for transportation, such as to work or to the store, and that biking caused at least some increase in breathing and heart rate? 1 = Daily, 2 = 2 to 3 times per week, 3 = Once a week, or 4 = Once a month? FH SH H FH = Fairly hard ( at least some increase in breathing and heart rate), SH = Somewhat hard ( moderate increase in breathing and heart rate), or H = Hard or very hard ( large increase in breathing and heart rate)? Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

7 Now think about the activities you did in the past week

1. [ SKIP IF NOT CURRENTLY EMPLOYED] In the past week, would you say your work activities were usually

1 Not hard = did not feel any increase in breathing or heart rate 2 Fairly light = at least some increase in breathing and heart rate 3 Somewhat hard = moderate increase in breathing and heart rate 4 Hard or very hard = large increase in breathing and heart rate 5. Think about how active you were during your non working and recreational hours in the past week. Would you say your activities were usually

1 not hard = you did not feel any increase in breathing or heart rate 2 fairly light = you had at least some increase in breathing and heart rate 3 somewhat hard = you had a moderate increase in breathing and heart rate 4 hard or very hard = you had a large increase in breathing and heart rate Now I will ask you to think about your typical daily activities during the past month.

6. Please tell me which of these four sentences best describes your usual daily activities over the past month? ( INTERVIEWER PROBE: Daily activities may include your work, housework, errands, and anything else you normally do throughout a typical day.)

1 You sit during the day and do not walk about very much 2 You stand or walk about quite a lot during the day, but do not have to carry or lift things very often 3 You lift or carry light loads, or have to climb stairs or hills often 4 You do heavy work or carry heavy loads 7. Over the past month, on a typical day how much time altogether did you spend sitting and watching TV or videos or using a computer outside of work? Would you say . . .

0 Less than 1 hour 1 1 hour 2 2 hours 3 3 hours 4 4 hours 5 5 hours or more 6 You do not watch TV or videos or use a computer outside of work 8. How does the amount of activity that you reported for the past month compare with your physical activity for the past 12 months? Over the past month, were you . . .

1 More active 2 Less active 3 About the same Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

8 9. Compared with most men your age, would you say that you are . . .

1 More active 2 Less active 3 About the same [ ASK Q21 IF MAN AGE >= 30] 10. Compared with yourself 10 years ago, would you say that you are . . .

1 More active now 2 Less active now 3 About the same { END OF ACTIVITY MODULE} Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

9 Personal Medical History ( Update)

Now I'd like to ask you about any changes to your general health.

1. Since your last interview on [ FILL DATE], have you developed any of the following health problems? ( CODE ALL THAT APPLY)

[ CAPI: ONLY DISPLAY ITEMS = NO FOR LAST INTERVIEW]

1 High blood pressure or hypertension 2 High blood sugar or diabetes 3 High cholesterol 4 Anemia ( poor blood, low iron) 5 Heart problems 6 Hayfever or allergy 7 Skin allergy or eczema 8 Asthma IF Q1 = 8, ASK Q2 4 ELSE, SKIP TO Q5 2. Did a doctor or other medical provider tell you that you have asthma?

1 YES 2 NO

SKIP TO Q5 3. Have you used any inhalers or taken any pills for asthma or wheezing or whistling in your chest?

1 YES 2 NO 4. Have you ever gone to an emergency room or stayed overnight in a hospital for your asthma?

1 YES 2 NO 5. Since your last interview on [ FILL DATE], have you been diagnosed with any other serious illnesses that I haven't asked about?

1 YES 2 NO

GO TO NEXT MODULE 5a. What were those illnesses? ( ENTER VERBATIM)

_______________________

6. Since [ FILL DATE], have you been hospitalized for any reason?

1 YES 2 NO

GO TO NEXT MODULE Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

10 6a. Why were you hospitalized? ( ENTER VERBATIM)

__________________________

{ END OF PERSONAL MEDICAL HISTORY MODULE} Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

11 Alcohol ( update)

The next few questions are about alcohol consumption. A " drink" is a can or bottle of beer, a glass of wine or a wine cooler, a shot of liquor, or a mixed drink with liquor in it. We are not asking about times when you only had a sip or two from a drink.

1. Since your last interview on [ FILL DATE], have you had any alcoholic drinks?

1 YES 2 NO

GO TO NEXT MODULE 2. Since your last interview on [ FILL DATE], how many alcoholic drinks did you have in an average week? Would you say

1 Less than 1 drink a week, 2 1 to 3 drinks a week, 3 4 to 6 drinks a week, 4 7 to 13 drinks a week, or 5 14 drinks or more a week?

3. Since your last interview on [ FILL DATE], how many times did you drink 5 alcoholic drinks or more in one sitting? Would you say

1 Never, 2 1 time, 3 2 or 3 times, 4 4 or 5 times, or 5 6 or more times?

{ END OF ALCOHOL MODULE} Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

12 Tobacco ( update)

These next questions are about your use of tobacco products. This includes cigarettes, chewing tobacco, snuff, cigars, and pipe tobacco.

1. Since your last interview on [ FILL DATE], have you used snuff, dip, or chewing tobacco, even once?

1 YES 2 NO 2. Since your last interview, have you smoked a cigar or tobacco pipe, even once?

1 YES 2 NO

SKIP TO Q3 2a. How often have you smoked cigars or tobacco pipes since your last interview?

_____ NUMBER OF TIMES ENTER UNIT 1 DAY 2 WEEK 3 MONTH [ IF SMOKER FROM PREVIOUS INTERVIEW, ASK Q3 Q4 ] [ IF NON SMOKER IN PREVIOUS INTERVIEW, SKIP TO Q5 ] 3. Do you still smoke cigarettes?

1 YES

SKIP TO Q6 2 NO 4. When did you stop smoking?

MM/ YYYY

SKIP TO Q7 5. In your last interview you reported that you were not smoking cigarettes. Are you currently smoking cigarettes now?

1 YES 2 NO

SKIP TO Q7 6. How many cigarettes do you smoke on an average day now? Would you say

1 Less than 1 cigarette per day, 2 1 to 5 cigarettes, 3 6 to 10 cigarettes, 4 11 to 20 cigarettes, 5 21 to 40 cigarettes, or 6 41 cigarettes or more? Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

13 7. In your last interview on [ FILL DATE], you reported that there were [ FILL #] cigarette smokers who lived in your home not including yourself. Is this still correct?

1 YES

SKIP TO Q9 2 NO 8. Not including yourself, how many cigarette smokers live in your home now?

_____

9. About how many hours per day are you in the same room with someone who is smoking cigarettes, cigars, or tobacco pipes?

_____ Hours 999 Less than 1 hour a day { END OF TOBACCO MODULE} Partner 6 Month ( Instrument # 24)

14 Acceptability ( To be administered at the end of the home visit)

This study will be able to answer health questions best if we are able to keep people involved in the study. To do this, we would like to get some feedback from you about the study overall and this visit today to help improve the study in the future.

1. Was participating in the visit today convenient for you?

1 YES

SKIP TO Q6 2 NO 2. Did you have to take time off from work to have this interview today?

1 YES 2 NO 3. Did you need to find childcare to have this interview today?

1 YES 2 NO 4. Were there any other major obstacles for you to have this interview today?

1 YES 2 NO

SKIP TO Q6 5. What were they? ( ENTER VERBATIM)

____________________________

6. Is there anything that you especially like about participating in this study? ( ENTER VERBATIM)

____________________________

7. Is there anything you especially dislike about participating in this study? ( ENTER VERBATIM)

____________________________

8. Finally, do you have any recommendations as to what we could do differently in the overall study or in these interviews? ( ENTER VERBATIM)

____________________________

{ END OF ACCEPTABILITY MODULE}


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 27 (Wednesday, February 9, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7447-7448]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02706]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL -9415-01-OA]

Notification of a Closed Meeting of the Science Advisory Board
2021 Scientific and Technological Achievement Awards Panel

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Science Advisory
Board (SAB) Staff Office announces a two-day meeting of the Scientific
and Technological Achievement Awards (STAA) Panel. The purpose of the
meeting is to review the 2021 STAA nominations and to make
recommendations for awards. The meeting is closed to the public.

DATES: The meeting of the SAB STAA Panel will be held on Monday, March
14, 2022, from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. (Eastern Time) and Tuesday,
March 15, 2022 from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. (Eastern Time). The meeting
will be conducted virtually.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Members of the public who wish to
obtain further information concerning this notice may contact Dr. Holly
Stallworth, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), via telephone (202) 564-
2073, or via email at [email protected]. General information
about the SAB as well as any updates concerning the meetings announced
in this notice can be found on the SAB website at https://sab.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background: The SAB was established pursuant to the Environmental
Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDDAA),
codified at 42 U.S.C. 4365, to provide independent scientific and
technical advice to the EPA Administrator on the scientific and
technical basis for agency positions and regulations. The SAB is a
Federal Advisory Committee chartered under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C., App. 2. The SAB will comply with the
provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural
policies. Pursuant to FACA and EPA policy, notice is hereby given that
the Science Advisory Board Scientific and Technological Achievement
Awards (STAA) Panel, will hold a closed meeting to review the 2021 STAA
nominations and to make recommendations for awards and recommendations
for improvement of the Agency's STAA program.

    The STAA awards are established to honor and recognize EPA
employees who have made outstanding contributions in the advancement of
science and technology through their research and development
activities, as exhibited in publication of their results in peer
reviewed journals. In conducting its review, the SAB considers each
nomination in relation to the following four award levels:
     Level I awards are for those who have accomplished an
exceptionally high-quality research or technological effort. The awards
recognize the creation or general revision of a scientific or
technological principle or procedure, or a highly significant
improvement in the value of a device, activity, program, or service to
the public. Awarded research is of national significance or has high
impact on a broad area of science/technology. The research has far
reaching consequences and is recognizable as a major scientific/
technological achievement within its discipline or field of study.
     Level II awards are for those who have accomplished a
notably excellent research or technological effort that has qualities
and values similar to, but to a lesser degree, than those described
under Level I. Awarded research has timely consequences and contributes
as an important scientific/technological achievement within its
discipline or field of study.
     Level III awards are for those who have accomplished an
unusually notable research or technological effort. The awards are for
a substantial revision or modification of a scientific/technological
principle or procedure, or an important improvement to the value of a
device, activity, program, or service to the public. Awarded research
relates to a mission or organizational component of the EPA, or
significantly affects a relevant area of science/technology.
     Honorable Mention awards acknowledge research efforts that
are noteworthy but do not warrant a Level I, II or III award. Honorable
Mention applies to research that: (1) May not quite reach the level
described for a Level III award; (2) show a promising area of research
that the STAA Panel wants to encourage; or (3) show an area of research
that the STAA Panel feels is too preliminary to warrant an award
recommendation at this time.
    The SAB reviews the STAA nomination packages according to the
following five evaluation factors:
     The extent to which the work reported in the nominated
publication(s) resulted in either new or significantly revised
knowledge. The accomplishment is expected to represent an important
advancement of scientific knowledge or technology relevant to
environmental issues and EPA's mission.
     The extent to which environmental protection has been
strengthened or improved, whether of local, national, or international
importance.
     The degree to which the research is a product of the
originality, creativeness, initiative, and problem-solving ability of
the researchers, as well as the level of effort required to produce the
results.
     The extent of the beneficial impact of the research and
the degree to which the research has been favorably recognized from
outside EPA.
     The nature and extent of peer review, including stature
and quality of the peer-reviewed journal or the publisher of a book for
a review chapter published therein.
    I have determined that the meetings of the STAA Panel and Chartered
SAB will be closed to the public because they are concerned with
selecting employees deserving of awards. In making these
recommendations, the Agency requires full and frank advice from the
SAB. This advice will involve professional judgments on the relative
merits of various employees and their respective work. Such personnel
matters involve the discussion of information that is of a personal
nature and the disclosure of which would be a clearly unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy and, therefore, are protected from
disclosure by section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2, and sections (c)(2) and (c)(6) of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6). Minutes of
the meetings of the STAA Panel and the Chartered SAB will be kept and
certified by the chair of those meetings.

Michael S. Regan,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2022-02706 Filed 2-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 65 (Thursday, April 4, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13332-13335]
[FR Doc No: 2019-06524]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-85466; File No. SR-CboeEDGX-2019-013]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
Relating To Amend Rule 21.5, Interpretation and Policy .01 To Specify
That Replacement Issues May Be Added to the Penny Pilot Program
(``Pilot'') on a Quarterly Basis, Without Altering the Expiration Date
of the Pilot, Which Is June 30, 2019

March 29, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 22, 2019, Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and

Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``EDGX'') proposes to
amend Rule 21.5, Interpretation and Policy .01 to specify that
replacement issues may be added to the Penny Pilot Program (``Pilot'')
on a quarterly basis, without altering the expiration date of the
Pilot, which is June 30, 2019. The text of the proposed rule change is
provided below.
(additions are italicized; deletions are [bracketed])
* * * * *

Rules of Cboe EDGX Exchange, Inc.

* * * * *
Rule 21.5. Minimum Increments
    (a)-(c) (No changes).

Interpretations and Policies

    01 The Exchange will operate a pilot program set to expire on June
30, 2019 to permit options classes to be quoted and traded in
increments as low as $.01. The Exchange will specify which options
trade in such pilot, and in what increments, in Information Circulars
distributed to Members and posted on the Exchange's website. The
Exchange may replace any penny pilot issues that have been delisted
with the next most actively traded multiply listed options classes that
are not yet included in the penny pilot, based on trading activity in
the previous six months. The replacement issues may be added to the
penny pilot on the second trading day in the first month of each
quarter [following January 1, 2019].
* * * * *
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://markets.cboe.com/us/options/regulation/rule_filings/edgx/), at the Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at
the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 21.5, Interpretation and Policy
.01, regarding the Pilot, to specify that replacement issues may be
added to the Pilot on a quarterly basis, without altering the
expiration date of the Pilot, which is June 30, 2019. The Exchange
recently filed to extend the Pilot until June 30, 2019 (from December
31, 2018) and also updated the rule text to provide that replacement
issues may be added to the Pilot on the second trading day following
January 1, 2019.\5\ The Rule authorizes the Exchange to replace any
options issues in the Pilot that have been delisted with the next most
actively traded multiply listed options classes that are not yet
included in the Program, based on trading activity in the previous six
months.\6\ The Exchange proposes to modify Rule 21.5, Interpretation
and Policy .01 to allow the Exchange to add replacement issues (for
Pilot issues that have been delisted) on a quarterly basis. The
Exchange added replacement issues in January 2019 and would be able to
add eligible replacement issues in April, July and October. The
Exchange believes this change would allow the Exchange to update issues
eligible for the Pilot (by replacing delisted issues) on a quarterly
basis (as opposed to semi-annual) and would enable further analysis of
the Pilot and a determination of how the Pilot should be structured in
the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 84946 (December 21,
2018), 83 FR 67757 (December 31, 2018) (SR-CboeEDGX-2018-061). On
January 3, 2019, the Exchange added new issues to replace delisted
Pilot issues, as announced by Product Update, available here, http://markets.cboe.com/resources/product_update/2019/Penny-Pilot-Replacement-Classes-for-January-3-2019-Updated.pdf.
    \6\ See Rule 21.5, Interpretation and Policy .01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As is the case today, the Exchange will determine replacement
issues based on trading activity in the previous six months (the ``six-
month lookback'') but will not use the month immediately preceding the
addition of a replacement to the Pilot. Thus, a replacement class to be
added on the second trading day following April 1, 2019 would be
identified based on The Option Clearing Corporation's trading volume
data from September 1, 2018 through February 28, 2019.\7\ The Exchange
believes the six-month lookback is appropriate because this time period
would help reduce the impact of unusual trading activity as a result of
unique market events, such as a corporate action (i.e., it would result
in a more reliable measure of average daily trading volume than would a
shorter period).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Exchange will continue to announce the replacement
issues by Exchange Notice. See supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This filing does not propose any substantive changes to the Pilot:
All classes currently participating will remain the same and all
minimum increments will remain unchanged. The Exchange believes the
benefits to public customers and other market participants who will be
able to express their true prices to buy and sell options have been
demonstrated to outweigh the increase in quote traffic.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act. Specifically, the Exchange
believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section
6(b)(5) requirements that the rules of an exchange be designed to
prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just
and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling,
processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions
in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to
protect investors and the public interest. Additionally, the Exchange
believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the Section
6(b)(5) requirement that the rules of an exchange not be designed to
permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers, brokers, or
dealers.
    In particular, the Exchange believes the proposal to allow the
addition of replacement issues the Pilot on a quarterly basis would
result in a more current list of Pilot-eligible issues and would enable
further analysis of the Pilot, including for a determination of how the
Pilot should be structured in the future. Further, the Exchange
believes the six-month lookback is appropriate because this time period
would help reduce the impact of

unusual trading activity as a result of unique market events, such as a
corporate action (i.e., it would result in a more reliable measure of
average daily trading volume than would a shorter period). Thus, the
Exchange believes this proposal would promote just and equitable
principles of trade, foster cooperation and coordination with persons
engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanisms of a free and open market and
a national market system.
    The Exchange notes that it is not making any other substantive
changes to the Pilot, other than modifying the timing for replacement
issues and therefore the Exchange will continue to participate in a
program that has been viewed as beneficial to traders, investors and
public customers and viewed as successful by the other options
exchanges participating in it. The Exchange believes that the Pilot
would continue to promote just and equitable principles of trade by
enabling public customers and other market participants to express
their true prices to buy and sell options to the benefit of all market
participants.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Specifically, the Exchange
believes that allowing the Exchange to add replacement issues to the
Pilot on a quarterly basis would make the list of Pilot-eligible issues
more current and would enable further analysis of the Pilot, including
for a determination of how the Pilot should be structured in the
future. In doing so, the proposed rule change will also serve to
promote regulatory clarity and consistency, thereby reducing burdens on
the marketplace and facilitating investor protection. The Pilot Program
is an industry-wide initiative supported by all other option exchanges.
The Exchange believes that the proposed change would allow for
continued competition between Exchange market participants trading
similar products as their counterparts on other exchanges, while at the
same time allowing the Exchange to continue to compete for order flow
with other exchanges in option issues trading as part of the Pilot.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\9\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \10\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\11\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Commission believes
that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The change will allow
the Exchange to add classes to the pilot that are actively traded at
the start of the second quarter (i.e., in April 2019) and replace those
that have been delisted and are no longer trading on a more frequent
basis. This will help ensure that the top 363 most actively traded,
multiply-listed classes are included in the Pilot, which will enable
further analysis of the Pilot.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \12\ For purposes only of waiving the operative delay for this
proposal, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact
on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \13\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2019-013 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2019-013. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official

business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do
not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CboeEDGX-2019-013
and should be submitted on or before April 25, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-06524 Filed 4-3-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 94 (Monday, May 16, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29651-29654]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10447]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-1183; Project Identifier AD-2021-01193-E;
Amendment 39-22029; AD 2022-09-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; CFM International, S.A. Turbofan
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
CFM International, S.A. (CFM) LEAP-1A23, LEAP-1A24, LEAP-1A24E1, LEAP-
1A26, LEAP-1A26CJ, LEAP-1A26E1, LEAP-1A29, LEAP-1A29CJ, LEAP-1A30,
LEAP-1A32, LEAP-1A33, LEAP-1A33B2, and LEAP-1A35A model turbofan
engines. This AD was prompted by the detection of melt-related freckles
in the billet, which may reduce the life of certain compressor rotor
stages 6-10 spools, high pressure turbine (HPT) rotor interstage seals,
HPT rotor stage 2 disks, low pressure turbine (LPT) stage 1 disks, LPT
stage 2 disks, LPT stage 3 disks, and LPT stage 4 disks. This AD
requires revising the airworthiness limitations section (ALS) of the
applicable CFM LEAP-1A Engine Shop Manual (ESM) and the operator's
existing approved continuous airworthiness maintenance program (CAMP)
to incorporate reduced life limits for these parts. This AD also
requires the removal of certain LPT stage 4 disks identified by serial
number (S/N) prior to their new life limits. The FAA is issuing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective June 21, 2022.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of June 21,
2022.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact CFM International, S.A., Aviation Operations Center, 1 Neumann
Way, M/D Room 285, Cincinnati, OH 45125; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected]. 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-2021-1183.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-1183; 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: Mehdi Lamnyi, Aviation Safety
Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803;
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 all CFM LEAP-1A23,
LEAP-1A24, LEAP-1A24E1, LEAP-1A26, LEAP-1A26CJ, LEAP-1A26E1, LEAP-1A29,
LEAP-1A29CJ, LEAP-1A30, LEAP-1A32, LEAP-1A33, LEAP-1A33B2, and LEAP-
1A35A model turbofan engines. The NPRM published

in the Federal Register on January 18, 2022 (87 FR 2563). The NPRM was
prompted by the manufacturer's detection of melt-related freckles in
the billet, which may reduce the life of certain compressor rotor
stages 6-10 spools, HPT rotor interstage seals, HPT rotor stage 2
disks, LPT stage 1 disks, LPT stage 2 disks, LPT stage 3 disks, and LPT
stage 4 disks (life-limited parts (LLPs)). Through the manufacturer's
investigation, it was determined that these LLPs may have subsurface
anomalies that developed during the manufacturing process, resulting in
a lower life capability. In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require
revising the ALS of the CFM LEAP-1A ESM, as applicable to each affected
engine model, and the operator's existing approved CAMP to incorporate
reduced life limits for certain LLPs. In the NPRM, the FAA also
proposed to require operators to remove certain LPT stage 4 disks,
identified by S/N, before reaching their new life limits. The LPT stage
4 disks, identified by S/N in Figure 1 to paragraph (g)(2) of the NPRM,
were discovered by the manufacturer after publication of the ALS
revision.
    After the NPRM was issued, CFM revised its service information by
including additional part numbers for newly manufactured parts that did
not exist prior to NPRM publication. Accordingly, the FAA has revised
paragraph (g)(1)(iii) of this AD to require operators to update the ALS
of the applicable CFM LEAP-1A ESM and the operator's existing approved
CAMP to include CFM Low Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-
11-04-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 010-00, dated February 15, 2022, instead of CFM
Low Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C,
Issue 009-00, dated June 1, 2021.
    The FAA has also added a credit for previous actions paragraph to
this AD, providing credit to operators that incorporated CFM Low
Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C, Issue
009-00, dated June 1, 2021, into the ALS of the applicable ESM and the
operator's existing approved CAMP prior to the effective date of this
AD.
    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 commenters. The commenters were
American Airlines (AA) and Air Line Pilot Association, International
(ALPA). The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Include Future Revisions to ESM

    AA requested that the FAA add `` . . . or later'' to the following
ALS references in paragraph (g) of this AD to allow for the use of
future revisions;
    (i) CFM High Pressure Compressor Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-
02-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 010-00, dated September 15, 2021, or later;
    (ii) CFM High Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-03-
01A-0B1B-C, Issue 007-00, dated September 15, 2021, or later; and
    (iii) CFM Low Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-04-
01A-0B1B-C, Issue 009-00, dated June 1, 2021, or later.
    AA stated that they are currently using Issues 7, 9, and 10 of the
referenced service information and their ALS and CAMP are already in
compliance with this AD. AA also stated that CFM continues to update
the referenced service information and Issues 7, 9, and 10 will be
further revised. As a result, the requirements of this AD will cause AA
to use outdated service information.
    The FAA disagrees with adding ``or later'' when referencing the
service information in paragraph (g) of this AD. Future revisions of
the service information have not yet been published by the manufacturer
or reviewed by the FAA. A request for an alternative method of
compliance can be submitted to the FAA if future revisions of the
service information referenced in paragraph (g) of this AD are
published. Additionally, if future revisions of the service information
are published by the manufacturer and approved by the FAA, the FAA may
consider further rulemaking.

Request To Add Credit for Previous Actions

    AA requested that the FAA add a new paragraph (h)(3) to this AD to
allow credit for previous actions associated with the required actions
proposed in paragraph (g)(1)(iii) of the NPRM, similar to the credit
paragraphs proposed in (h)(1) and (h)(2) of the NPRM. AA requested that
the new paragraph (h)(3) provide credit to operators if CFM Low
Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C, Issue
008-00 was incorporated into the ALS of the applicable ESM and the
operator's existing approved CAMP prior to the effective date of this
AD.
    The FAA notes that CFM Low Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP
1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 009-00, dated June 1, 2021, was the first
issue of this service information to include the reduced life limits
for that module as a result of the investigation into melt-related
freckles in the billet. Issue 008-00 and earlier issues do not include
the reduced life limits so the FAA will not provide credit for issues
released prior to Issue 009-00. Since the FAA issued the NPRM, the
manufacturer published CFM Low Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP
1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 010-00, dated February 15, 2022. As a
result, the FAA has added paragraph (h)(3) to this AD, providing credit
for actions required by paragraph (g)(1)(iii) of this AD if CFM Low
Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C, Issue
009-00, dated June 1, 2021, was incorporated into the ALS of the
applicable ESM and the operator's existing approved CAMP prior to the
effective date of this AD.

Support for the AD

    ALPA expressed support for the AD as written.

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. Except for minor editorial changes and any
other changes described previously, this AD is adopted as proposed in
the NPRM. None of the changes will increase the economic burden on any
operator.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed CFM High Pressure Compressor Rotor Life Limits
LEAP 1A-05-11-02-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 010-00, dated September 15, 2021
(CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-02-01A-0B1B-C); CFM High Pressure Turbine Rotor Life
Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-03-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 007-00, dated September 15,
2021 (CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-03-01A-0B1B-C); and CFM Low Pressure Turbine
Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 010-00, dated
February 15, 2022 (CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C). CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-
02-01A-0B1B-C provides the new life limits for the high-pressure
compressor, CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-03-01A-0B1B-C provides the new life
limits for the HPT rotor, and CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C

provides the new life limits for the LPT rotor. 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.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-02-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 009-00,
dated July 26, 2021; CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-03-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 006-00,
dated July 26, 2021, and CFM LEAP 1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 009,
dated June 1, 2021. This service information provides the new life
limits for the LLPs.
    The FAA also reviewed CFM Service Bulletin (SB) LEAP-1A-72-00-0413-
01A-930A-D, Issue 004-00, dated December 11, 2021 (CFM SB LEAP-1A-72-
00-0413-01A-930A-D). CFM SB LEAP-1A-72-00-0413-01A-930A-D specifies
procedures for removing and replacing the LLPs, and provides new life
limits for certain S/Ns of the LLPs.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 256 engines installed on
airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates that 256 engines
installed on airplanes of U.S. registry require revising the ALS of the
CFM LEAP-1A ESM and the operator's existing approved CAMP. The FAA
estimates that zero airplanes of U.S. registry require replacement of
the LPT stage 4 disk.
    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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revise ALS of Engine Manual and the     1 work-hour x $85 per                 $0             $85         $21,760
 operator's existing approved CAMP.      hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to replace the LPT stage 4
disk:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replace LPT Stage 4 disk..............  225 work-hours x $85 per        $129,000        $148,125              $0
                                         hour = $19,125.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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:

2022-09-09 CFM International, S.A.: Amendment 39-22029; Docket No.
FAA-2021-1183; Project Identifier AD-2021-01193-E.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective June 20, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to CFM International, S.A. (CFM) LEAP-1A23,
LEAP-1A24, LEAP-1A24E1, LEAP-1A26, LEAP-1A26CJ, LEAP-1A26E1, LEAP-
1A29, LEAP-1A29CJ, LEAP-1A30, LEAP-1A32, LEAP-1A33, LEAP-1A33B2, and
LEAP-1A35A model turbofan engines.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7230, Turbine Engine
Compressor Section, and JASC Code 7250, Turbine Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by the detection of melt-related freckles
in the billet, which may reduce the life of certain compressor rotor
stages 6-10 spools, high pressure turbine (HPT) rotor interstage
seals, HPT rotor stage

2 disks, low pressure turbine (LPT) stage 1 disks, LPT stage 2
disks, LPT stage 3 disks, and LPT stage 4 disks. The FAA is issuing
this AD to prevent the failure of the high-pressure compressor, HPT
rotor, and LPT rotor. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could
result in release of uncontained debris, damage to the engine, and
damage to the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    (1) Within 60 days after the effective date of this AD, revise
the airworthiness limitations section (ALS) of the applicable CFM
LEAP-1A Engine Shop Manual (the ESM) and the operator's existing
approved continuous airworthiness maintenance program (CAMP) by
incorporating the following service information:
    (i) CFM High Pressure Compressor Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-
11-02-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 010-00, dated September 15, 2021; and
    (ii) CFM High Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-
03-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 007-00, dated September 15, 2021; and
    (iii) CFM Low Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-
04-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 010-00, dated February 15, 2022.
    (2) Before the LPT stage 4 disk, part number (P/N) 362-039-520-
0, with serial numbers identified in Figure 1 to paragraph (g)(2) of
this AD (Figure 1) accumulates the cycles in Figure 1, or within 100
cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later,
remove the affected LPT stage 4 disk from service and replace with a
part eligible for installation.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16MY22.000

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) You may take credit for the action required by paragraph
(g)(1)(i) of this AD if the following service information was
incorporated into the ALS of the applicable ESM and the operator's
existing approved CAMP prior to the effective date of this AD: CFM
High Pressure Compressor Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-02-01A-
0B1B-C, Issue 009-00, dated July 26, 2021.
    (2) You may take credit for the action required by paragraph
(g)(1)(ii) of this AD if the following service information was
incorporated into the ALS of the applicable ESM and the operator's
existing approved CAMP prior to the effective date of this AD: CFM
High Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-03-01A-0B1B-C,
Issue 006-00, dated July 26, 2021.
    (3) You may take credit for the action required by paragraph
(g)(1)(iii) of this AD if the following service information was
incorporated into the ALS of the applicable ESM and the operator's
existing approved CAMP prior to the effective date of this AD: CFM
Low Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-04-01A-0B1B-C,
Issue 009-00, dated June 1, 2021.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, ECO 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 (j) of this AD. You may email your request
to: [email protected].
    (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.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Mehdi Lamnyi,
Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, MA 01803; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email: [email protected].

(k) 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) CFM High Pressure Compressor Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-
11-02-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 010-00, dated September 15, 2021.
    (ii) CFM High Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-
03-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 007-00, dated September 15, 2021.
    (iii) CFM Low Pressure Turbine Rotor Life Limits LEAP 1A-05-11-
04-01A-0B1B-C, Issue 010-00, dated February 15, 2022.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact CFM
International, S.A., Aviation Operations Center, 1 Neumann Way, M/D
Room 285, Cincinnati, OH 45125; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].
    (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 April 15, 2022.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-10447 Filed 5-13-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 231 (Tuesday, December 1, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77233-77234]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26481]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2020-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2072]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, the FIRM and FIS
report, once effective, will be used by insurance agents and others to
calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings
and the contents of those buildings.

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before March 1, 2021.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location https://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2072, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC
exception occurred on : 2020-26481.htm
exception occurred on : 2020-26481.htm
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email) pat[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and are used to calculate the appropriate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after the FIRM
and FIS report become effective.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location
https://www.fema.gov/preliminaryfloodhazarddata and the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities
with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be
identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date
listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service

Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Michael M. Grimm,
Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Craighead County, Arkansas and Incorporated Areas
          Project: 18-06-0001S Preliminary Date: June 30, 2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Bay............................  City Hall, 220 Elder Street,
                                          Bay, AR 72411.
City of Bono...........................  City Hall, 241 East College
                                          Street, Bono, AR 72416.
City of Brookland......................  City Hall, 613 Holman,
                                          Brookland, AR 72417.
City of Caraway........................  City Hall, 102 East State
                                          Street, Caraway, AR 72419.
City of Cash...........................  City Hall, 4391 Highway 18,
                                          Cash, AR 72421.
City of Jonesboro......................  City Hall, 300 South Church
                                          Street, Jonesboro, AR 72401.
City of Lake City......................  City Hall, 406 Court Street,
                                          Lake City, AR 72437.
City of Monette........................  City Hall, 1 Drew Avenue,
                                          Monette, AR 72447.
Town of Egypt..........................  Town Hall, 11063 Highway 91,
                                          Egypt, AR 72427.
Unincorporated Areas of Craighead        Craighead County Annex, 511
 County.                                  Union, Room 119, Jonesboro, AR
                                          72401.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Hyde County, North Carolina and Incorporated Areas
        Project: 11-04-0730S Preliminary Date: November 30, 2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unincorporated Areas of Hyde County....  Hyde County Government Center,
                                          30 Oyster Creek Road, Swan
                                          Quarter, NC 27885.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2020-26481 Filed 11-30-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


E [C]/R Incorporated
                  Providing Environmental Technical Support Since 1989

MEMORANDUM

DATE:		February 11, 2011

TO:		Melanie King, EPA OAQPS/SPPD/ESG

FROM:	Tanya Parise, EC/R, Inc.

SUBJECT:	Summary of the January 26, 2011 Meeting with API Regarding CPMS Requirements in the RICE NESHAP

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

INTRODUCTION

      The American Petroleum Institute (API) requested this meeting to follow-up on earlier meetings with EPA.  Summaries of the two previous meetings between EPA and API on this issue are available in the docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0708-0693 and 0696).  API wanted to discuss the specific issues it has with the continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) requirements in the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE).  The most recent amendments to the NESHAP for stationary RICE were published in the Federal Register on August 20, 2010 (75 FR 51570).

ATTENDEES

Melanie King, EPA
Jeff Adams, BP
Michael Horowitz, EPA (by phone)
Jeff Panek, IES
Peter Westlin, EPA
James Harrison, Exterran
Barrett Parker, EPA
Rebecca Rentz, Bracewell & Giuliani (by phone)
Jason Dewees, EPA
Tom Monahan, ExxonMobil (by phone)
Colin Boswell, EPA
John Wagner, API (by phone)
Tanya Parise, EC/R
Clay Freeberg, Chevron (by phone)
Matt Todd, API
Jenny Yang, Marathon (by phone)
John Admire, DCP Midstream
Bill Wehrum, Hunton & Williams (by phone)
Rex War, DCP Midstream
Jim McCarthy, IES (by phone)

SUMMARY OF MEETING

	API expressed that it wished to have a comprehensive discussion with EPA to explore in detail possible solutions to the issues related to the CPMS requirements.  API provided a rough agenda for the meeting consisting of the following, which is loosely followed in this meeting summary:

   * Introduction and Purpose
   * Major Source CPMS Performance Specifications
         o Temperature Monitoring
         o Data Availability, Validity and Averaging
   * Area Source Monitoring and Compliance Assurance Concerns
         o Unmanned rural area source technical challenges and issues
         o Alternatives to continuous monitoring at area sources

	API reiterated that it has raised significant issues in earlier meetings related to the CPMS requirements in the rule and it is particularly urgent to resolve these issues as they relate to major sources.  API's request for an administrative stay on the CPMS requirements was granted; however, the stay will run out shortly and API indicated it is primarily focusing on trying to resolve the CPMS issues in time for major sources to comply with the rule.

Temperature Monitoring

	Language currently in the rule requires that sources conduct a temperature calibration check at least every 90 days, and API indicated that there is a lot of uncertainty about that requirement.  API expressed that the thermocouple either works or not, and although over time it might fail, it is more important, in API's opinion, to verify the performance of temperature measurement equipment as opposed to calibrating the thermocouple.  EPA said that redundant thermocouples could be used for the calibration and further said that it seems like it would be appropriate to allow the owner/operator the discretion to determine what temperature calibration means to use.  API noted that the language in the rule might have been clearer if the requirement stated that sources needed to "verify performance."  Further, API said that if sources have the flexibility in their monitoring plans to define how to verify devices this might be something that would be appropriate in covering a variety of different scenarios.  API also expressed that the requirement to conduct performance checks quarterly is excessive because temperature measurement technology is stable.  API added that the personnel needed to conduct performance checks would be different than the normal staff/operator and would necessitate a technical expert.

	EPA asked what API proposed as an alternative period.  API responded that though the temperature might drift, it is generally stable and therefore proposed a year, reiterating again that quarterly/every 3 months is too much in API's opinion.

Data Availability

	API argued that the 100 percent data capture requirement is too high and is higher than what is required in other rules.  EPA noted that some situations are excluded from data capture. For instance, data during malfunctions, calibrations checks, and repairs are not required to be collected.  Therefore, since these are exceptions, it is not a 100 percent data capture, EPA said.  The goal is to keep the monitoring system operating at all times when the equipment is running, EPA emphasized.  API added that it may have periods without data for a number of reasons, e.g., loss of power, and may have deviations beyond its control that it might not be able to document.  In other words, there may be situations where data is missing, but the cause for the data gap may remain unknown.  API was concerned that missed 15-minute periods could lead to Title V permit deviations and asked EPA to allow compliance to be demonstrated without having all periods.  EPA asked what API recommended for an alternative.  In response, API proposed that perhaps two 15-minute periods would be an appropriate data capture amount to represent 1 hour.  API further recommended that EPA look at the 4-hour rolling period only and consider allowing a certain number of data gaps.  Specifically, API suggested that a valid 4-hour average consist of 3 hours worth of data or that a valid 1-hour period consist of 30 minutes of data.

Area Sources

	API asked for more flexibility in demonstrating catalyst activity for area sources under the rule and recommended an assurance method to indicate that the catalyst is working in conjunction with carbon monoxide (CO) portable measurements.  API indicated that it believes such methods would provide a good indication of catalyst performance.  EPA asked what API specifically recommended and API suggested a work practice standard or a limit with a work practice standard for compliance purposes.  API expressed that it would like to move away from reference method stack testing (Method 320/FTIR) since there is no portable option to measure formaldehyde.  EPA noted that the Engine Manufacturers Association (EMA) has asked EPA to consider using total hydrocarbons (THC) as an indicator of catalyst performance or having THC as a limit.  API indicated that it has reviewed the information from the EMA, but said that the information from EMA focused on THC because, according to API, EMA did not believe that EPA was open to the idea of allowing the use of CO.  In fact, according to API, CO is more indicative of catalyst activity and how well formaldehyde is being reduced than THC.  Further, API added that portable analyzers do not measure THC, it is more problematic to measure THC emissions, and methane dominates the THC measurement in engines burning natural gas.  API clarified that it was not suggesting that CO be used as a surrogate; only as a pollutant that would show catalyst activity after which the source would follow-up with a performance test or replacement of the catalyst.

	EPA asked about the frequency of performance testing, specifically what API thought of quarterly and semi-annual tests.  API responded that it would prefer annual testing, but was okay with semi-annual testing as well, adding that coordinating the timing of performance testing becomes important with a quarterly test schedule.

	API expressed concerns with the pressure checks, which are required to be performed monthly, because during these checks, operators also have to conduct a load determination, which is especially problematic at area sources.  API made the point that if a CO test is being done, that would essentially do the same thing as what the pressure drop is intended to do, i.e., indicate catalyst activity.

	As it relates to area sources, API reiterated from previous meetings with EPA that there are problems with the CPMS requirements because of communication issues, end-of-line power issues, and so on.

	The meeting closed with API indicating that it would provide specific material to EPA in short order with recommendations on CPMS language that API believes would be appropriate.