burning CTRTs, and no other solid wastes, and who had planned to
continue burning these materials, may experience cost savings
associated with the potential modification and operational adjustments
of their affected units. In this case, the unit-level cost savings are

estimated, on average, to be approximately $266,000 per year. In
addition, the increased regulatory clarity and certainty associated
with this action may stimulate increased product fuel use for one or
more of these NHSMs, potentially resulting in upstream life cycle
benefits associated with reduced extraction of selected virgin
materials.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) waived review. The EPA prepared an economic
analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with this
action. This analysis, ``Assessment of the Potential Costs, Benefits,
and Other Impacts for the Proposed Rule--Categorical Non-Waste
Determination for Selected Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials (NHSMs):
Creosote-Borate Treated Railroad Ties, Copper Naphthenate Treated
Railroad Ties, and Copper Naphthenate-Borate Treated Railroad Ties'',
is available in the docket. Interested persons are encouraged to read
and comment on this document.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the PRA as this action only proposes to add three new categorical
non-waste fuels to the NHSM regulations. OMB has previously approved
the information collection activities contained in the existing
regulations and has assigned OMB control number 2050-0205.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. The proposed addition of three NHSMs to
the list of categorical non-waste fuels is expected to indirectly
reduce materials management costs. In addition, this action will reduce
regulatory uncertainty associated with these materials and help
increase management efficiency. We have therefore concluded that this
action will relieve regulatory burden for all directly regulated small
entities. We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the
proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related
to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action contains no Federal mandates as described in UMRA, 2
U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. UMRA generally excludes from the definition of ``Federal
intergovernmental mandate'' duties that arise from participation in a
voluntary Federal program. Affected entities are not required to manage
the proposed additional NHSMs as non-waste fuels. As a result, this
action may be considered voluntary under UMRA. Therefore, this action
is not subject to the requirements of section 202 or 205 of the UMRA
    This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203
of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. In addition, this
proposal will not impose direct compliance costs on small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It will neither impose substantial direct
compliance costs on tribal governments, nor preempt Tribal law.
Potential aspects associated with the categorical non-waste fuel
determinations under this proposed rule may invoke minor indirect
tribal implications to the extent that entities generating or
consolidating these NHSMs on tribal lands could be affected. However,
any impacts are expected to be negligible. Thus, Executive Order 13175
does not apply to this action.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in the Executive Order 12866,
and because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to
children. Based on the following discussion, the Agency found that
populations of children near potentially affected boilers are either
not significantly greater than national averages, or in the case of
landfills, may potentially result in reduced discharges near such
populations.
    The proposed rule, in conjunction with the corresponding CAA rules,
may indirectly stimulate the increased fuel use of one of more the
three NHSMs by providing enhanced regulatory clarity and certainty.
This increased fuel use may result in the diversion of a certain
quantity of these NHSMs away from current baseline management
practices. Any corresponding disproportionate impacts among children
would depend upon whether children make up a disproportionate share of
the population living near the affected units. Therefore, to assess the
potential an indirect disproportionate effect on children, we conducted
a demographic analysis for this population group surrounding CAA
section 112 major source boilers, municipal solid waste landfills, and
construction and demolition (C&D) landfills for the Major and Area
Source Boilers rules and the CISWI rule.\39\ We assessed the share of
the population under the age of 18 living within a three-mile
(approximately five kilometers) radius of these facilities. Three miles
has been used often in other demographic analyses focused on areas
around industrial sources.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ The extremely large number of area source boilers and the
absence of site-specific coordinates prevented us from assessing the
demographics of populations located near these sources. In addition,
we did not assess child population percentages surrounding cement
kilns that may use some out-of-service railroad crossties for their
thermal value.
    \40\ The following publications which have provided demographic
information using a 3-mile or 5-kilometer circle around a facility:
    * U.S. GAO (Government Accountability Office). Demographics of
People Living Near Waste Facilities. Washington DC: Government
Printing Office 1995.
    * Mohai P, Saha R. ``Reassessing Racial and Socio-economic
Disparities in Environmental Justice Research''. Demography.
2006;43(2): 383-399.
    * Mennis, Jeremy ``Using Geographic Information Systems to
Create and Analyze Statistical Surfaces of Population and Risk for
Environmental Justice Analysis'' Social Science Quarterly, 2002,
83(1):281-297.
    * Bullard RD, Mohai P, Wright B, Saha R et al. Toxic Wastes and
Race at Twenty, 1987-2007, March 2007. 5 CICWI Rule and Major Source
Boilers Rule.

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

    For major source boilers, our findings indicate that the percentage
of the population in these areas under age 18 years is generally the
same as the national average.\41\ In addition, while the fuel source
and corresponding emission mix for some of these boilers may change as
an indirect response to this rule, emissions from these sources would
remain subject to the protective CAA section 112 standards. For
municipal solid waste and C&D landfills, we do not have demographic
results specific to children. However, using the population below the
poverty level as a rough surrogate for children, we found that within
three miles of facilities that may experience diversions of one or more
of these NHSMs, low-income populations, as a percent of the total
population, are disproportionately high relative to the national
average. Thus, to the extent that these NHSMs are diverted away from
municipal solid waste or C&D landfills, any landfill-related emissions,
discharges, or other negative activity potentially affecting low-income
(children) populations living near these units are likely to be
reduced. Finally, transportation emissions associated with the
diversion of some of this material away from landfills to boilers are
likely to be generally unchanged, while these emissions are likely to
be reduced for on-site generators of paper recycling residuals that
would reduce off-site shipments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ U.S. EPA, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery.
Summary of Environmental Justice Impacts for the Non-Hazardous
Secondary Material (NHSM) Rule, the 2010 Commercial and Industrial
Solid Waste Incinerator (CISWI) Standards, the 2010 Major Source
Boiler NESHAP and the 2010 Area Source Boiler NESHAP. February 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

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

    The EPA believes that it is not feasible to determine whether this
action has disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority
populations, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
However, the overall level of emissions, or the emissions mix from
affected boilers are not expected to change significantly because the
three NHSMs proposed to be categorically listed as non-waste fuels are
generally comparable to the types of fuels that these combustors would
otherwise burn. Furthermore, these units remain subject to the
protective standards established under CAA section 112.
    Our environmental justice demographics assessment conducted for the
prior rulemaking \42\ remains relevant to this action. This assessment
reviewed the distributions of minority and low-income groups living
near potentially affected sources using U.S. Census blocks. A three-
mile radius (approximately five kilometers) was examined in order to
determine the demographic composition (e.g., race, income, etc.) of
these blocks for comparison to the corresponding national compositions.
Findings from this analysis indicated that populations living within
three miles of major source boilers represent areas with minority and
low-income populations that are higher than the national averages. In
these areas, the minority share \43\ of the population was 33 percent,
compared to the national average of 25 percent. For these same areas,
the percent of the population below the poverty line (16 percent) was
higher than the national average (13 percent).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ U.S. EPA, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery.
Summary of Environmental Justice Impacts for the Non-Hazardous
Secondary Material (NHSM) Rule, the 2010 Commercial and Industrial
Solid Waste Incinerator (CISWI) Standards, the 2010 Major Source
Boiler NESHAP and the 2010 Area Source Boiler NESHAP. February 2011.
    \43\ This figure is for overall population minus white
population and does not include the Census group defined as ``White
Hispanic.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the demographics assessment described previously, we
also considered the potential for non-combustion environmental justice
concerns related to the potential incremental increase in NHSMs
diversions from current baseline management practices. These may
include the following:
     Reduced upstream emissions resulting from the reduced
production of virgin fuel: Any reduced upstream emissions that may
indirectly occur in response to reduced virgin fuel mining or
extraction may result in a human health and/or environmental benefit to
minority and low-income populations living near these projects.
     Alternative materials transport patterns: Transportation
emissions associated with NHSMs diverted from landfills to boilers are
likely to be similar, except for on-site paper recycling residuals,
where the potential for less off-site transport to landfills may result
in reduced truck traffic and emissions where such transport patterns
may pass through minority or low-income communities.
     Change in emissions from baseline management units: The
diversion of some of these NHSMs away from disposal in landfills may
result in a marginal decrease in activity at these facilities. This may
include non-adverse impacts, such as marginally reduced emissions,
odors, groundwater and surface water impacts, noise pollution, and
reduced maintenance cost to local infrastructure. Because municipal
solid waste and C&D landfills were found to be located in areas where
minority and low-income populations are disproportionately high
relative to the national average, any reduction in activity and
emissions around these facilities is likely to benefit the citizens
living near these facilities.
    Finally, this rule, in conjunction with the corresponding CAA
rules, may help accelerate the abatement of any existing stockpiles of
the targeted NHSMs. To the extent that these stockpiles may represent
negative human health or environmental implications, minority and/or
low-income populations that live near such stockpiles may experience
marginal health or environmental improvements. Aesthetics may also be
improved in such areas.
    As previously discussed, this RCRA proposed action alone does not
directly require any change in the management of these materials. Thus,
any potential materials management changes stimulated by this action,
and corresponding impacts to minority and low-income communities, are
considered to be indirect impacts, and would only occur in conjunction
with the corresponding CAA rules.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR part 241

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Waste treatment
and disposal.

    Dated: October 19, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA proposes to amend
40,CFR chapter I as set forth below:

PART 241--SOLID WASTES USED AS FUELS OR INGREDIENTS IN COMBUSTION
UNITS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 241 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6903, 6912, 7429.

0
2. Section 241.2 is amended by adding in alphabetical order the
definitions ``Copper naphthenate treated railroad ties'', ``Copper
naphthenate-borate treated railroad ties'' and ``Creosote-borate
treated railroad ties'' to read as follows:

Sec.  241.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Copper naphthenate treated railroad ties means railroad ties
treated with copper naphthenate made from naphthenic acid and copper
salt.
    Copper naphthenate-borate treated railroad ties means railroad ties
treated with copper naphthenate and borate made from disodium
octaborate tetrahydrate.
    Creosote-borate treated railroad ties means railroad ties treated
with a wood preservative containing creosols and phenols and made from
coal tar oil and borate made from disodium octaborate tetrahydrate.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 241.4 is amended by adding paragraphs (a)(8) through (10) to
read as follows:

Sec.  241.4  Non-waste Determinations for Specific Non-Hazardous
Secondary Materials When Used as a Fuel.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (8) Creosote-borate treated railroad ties, and mixtures of
creosote, borate and copper naphthenate treated railroad ties that are
processed (which must include at a minimum, metal removal and shredding
or grinding) and then combusted in the following types of units:
    (i) Units designed to burn both biomass and fuel oil as part of
normal operations and not solely as part of start-up or shut-down
operations, and
    (ii) Units at major source pulp and paper mills or power producers
subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDD that combust creosote-borate
treated railroad ties and mixed creosote, borate and copper naphthenate
treated railroad ties, and had been designed to burn biomass and fuel
oil, but are modified (e.g., oil delivery mechanisms are removed) in
order to use natural gas instead of fuel oil, as part of normal
operations and not solely as part of start-up or shut-down operations.
The creosote-borate and mixed creosote, borate and copper naphthenate
treated railroad ties may continue to be combusted as product fuel
under this subparagraph only if the following conditions are met, which
are intended to ensure that such railroad ties are not being discarded:
    (A) Creosote-borate and mixed creosote, borate and copper
naphthenate treated railroad ties must be burned in existing (i.e.,
commenced construction prior to April 14, 2014) stoker, bubbling bed,
fluidized bed, or hybrid suspension grate boilers; and
    (B) Creosote-borate and mixed creosote, borate and copper
naphthenate treated railroad ties can comprise no more than 40 percent
of the fuel that is used on an annual heat input basis.
    (9) Copper naphthenate treated railroad ties that are processed
(which must include at a minimum, metal removal and shredding or
grinding) and then combusted in units designed to burn biomass or units
designed to burn both biomass and fuel oil.
    (10) Copper naphthenate-borate treated railroad ties that are
processed (which must include at a minimum, metal removal and shredding
or grinding) and then combusted in units designed to burn biomass or
units designed to burn both biomass and fuel oil.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-26381 Filed 10-31-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 251 (Thursday, December 31, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 86917-86918]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28994]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OLEM-2016-0465, FRL-10018-57-OMS]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; Information Requirements for
Boilers and Industrial Furnaces (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), Information Requirements for
Boilers and Industrial Furnaces (EPA ICR Number 1361.18, OMB Control
Number 2050-0073) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act.
This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved
through January 31, 2021. Public comments were previously requested via
the Federal Register on March 26, 2020 during a 60-day comment period.
This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A
fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated
burden and cost to the public. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and
a person is not required to respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before February 1,
2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments to EPA, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OLEM-2016-0465, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460. EPA's policy is that all
comments received will be included in the public docket without change
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
    Submit written comments and recommendations to OMB for the proposed
information collection within 30 days of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Vyas, Office of Resource
Conservation and Recovery (mail code 5303P), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: EPA regulates the burning of hazardous waste in boilers,
incinerators, and industrial furnaces (BIFs) under 40 CFR parts 63,
264, 265, 266 and 270. This ICR describes the paperwork requirements
that apply to the owners and operators of BIFs. This includes the
general facility requirements at 40 CFR parts 264 and 265, subparts B
thru H; the requirements applicable to BIF units at 40 CFR part 266;
and the RCRA Part B permit application and modification requirements at
40 CFR part 270.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Business or other for-profit.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (per 40 CFR 264, 265,
and 270).
    Estimated number of respondents: 36 (total).
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Total estimated burden: 39,758 hours per year. Burden is defined at
5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $5,499,098 (per year), which includes $0 in
annualized capital/startup, and $2,823,120 in annualized operation &
maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 231,600 hours in
the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently
approved by OMB. This decrease is due to a decrease in the size of the
universe, from 105 facilities to 36 facilities. This decrease is due
partly to closures of boilers in both permitted and interim status
facilities, but is mostly due to a clean-up of the data, because
previously there had been double-counting of facilities as being both
permitted and interim status. The reason for the double-counting was
that one facility could have both permitted boilers and non-permitted
boilers (i.e., in interim status). Currently, however, there are no
boilers in interim status; they are either permitted or they have been
closed.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2020-28994 Filed 12-30-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Abt Associates Inc.  1 memorandum Environmental Research Area 4800 Montgomery Lane, Suite 600 # Bethesda, MD 20814 5341 # ( 301) 913 0500 Date: February 24, 2003 To: Lynn Zipf, USEPA/ Office of Water From: Susan Keane and Kristina Watts, Abt Associates Subject: Evaluation of the Appropriateness of Representative Chemicals for Influential Chemical Groups ( Task1.2 for Work Assignment 3 11 under Contract No. 68 C99 239)

Abt Associates previously determined a set of the most influential chemical groups in the Risk Screening Environmental Indicator ( RSEI) model. Our subcontractor, Great Lakes Environmental Center ( GLEC), evaluated whether the chosen representative chemical for these groups is reasonable, given what is known about typical conditions of wastewater treatment and water bodies to which effluents may be discharged. We have attached their complete report. A summary of the chemical representatives that should, in GLEC's view, be used in the RSEI model is as follows:

Chemical Group Appropriate Representative Chemical Chromium compounds Cr( III), or if bioavailability in aquatic environments is important, dissolved Cr( III).

Lead compounds Pb( II), or if bioavailability in aquatic environments is important, dissolved Pb( II).

Copper compounds Cu( II), or if aquatic bioavailability in aquatic environments is important, dissolved Cu( II).

Cyanide compounds Total HCN plus CN ( free cyanide)

Mercury compounds Inorganic Hg( II) and methylmercury, or if bioavailability in aquatic environments is important, dissolved Hg( II) and methylmercury. If toxicity is the important consideration, methylmercury. Abt Associates Inc. These findings indicate that the representative chemicals for both Chromium compounds and Cyanide compounds should change from what is currently used in the RSEI model. Replacing chromium ( IV) with chromium ( III) has been previously discussed. The reference dose ( RfD) for free cyanide is 0.02 mg/ kgday This corresponds to an oral toxicity weight of 25. Currently we are using an oral toxicity weight of 100, based on an RfD of 0.005 mg/ kg day for copper cyanide.

Upon your direction, Abt Associates will update the pollutant group toxicity values in the RSEI model ( Task 1.3) for both Chromium and Cyanide compounds. Abt Associates Inc. Evaluation of the Representativeness of Designated Aqueous Chemical Species for Five Chemical Groups to be used in the RSEI Model Submitted to:

Abt Associates 55 Wheeler Street Cambridge, MA 02138 1168 Prepared by: 739 Hastings Street Traverse City, Michigan 49686 Phone: ( 231) 941 2230 Facsimile: ( 231) 941 2240 E mail Address: mick@ glec tc. com February 19, 2003 Abt Associates Inc. INTRODUCTION EPA's Risk Screening Environmental Indicators ( RSEI) model uses effluent data reported in the Toxics Release Inventory ( TRI) to estimate relative environmental impacts of discharges to both water and air. The RSEI model makes the assumption that all chemical compounds reported in the TRI have toxicities equivalent to a specific representative chemical or chemical form. Abt Associates contracted GLEC to evaluate the representativeness of the chosen chemical form in aqueous media for five chemical groups:

Chemical Group Designated Representative Chromium compounds ( chromium VI) Lead compounds ( lead) Copper compounds ( copper) Cyanide compounds ( copper cyanide) Mercury compounds ( methylmercury)

GLEC was requested to evaluate the appropriateness of the designated chemical representative regarding its toxicity and physicochemical properties, considering the wastewater and drinking water treatment technologies commonly employed. GLEC also was tasked with evaluating the representativeness of the designated chemical with respect to its behavior in natural surface waters receiving discharges containing the chemical groups. If there were any cases in which the designated chemical species was deemed to be inappropriate, GLEC was requested to recommend a more appropriate form. Abt Associates Inc. RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The five chemical groups and their selected chemical representatives were reviewed and evaluated; the individual reviews follow. In GLEC's judgment, the following chemical representatives should be used for each group:

° Chromium compounds: Cr( III), or if bioavailability in aquatic environments is important, dissolved Cr( III).

° Lead compounds: Pb( II), or if bioavailability in aquatic environments is important, dissolved Pb( II).

° Copper compounds: Cu( II), or if aquatic bioavailability in aquatic environments is important, dissolved Cu( II).

° Cyanide compounds: Total HCN plus CN.

° Mercury compounds: Inorganic Hg( II) and methylmercury, or if bioavailability in aquatic environments is important, dissolved Hg( II) and methylmercury. If toxicity is the important consideration, methylmercury. Abt Associates Inc. CHROMIUM COMPOUNDS The most important chromium species in aqueous systems are the trivalent and hexavalent forms, Cr( III) and Cr( VI). Tripositive chromium behaves chemically somewhat like iron( III) and forms a highly insoluble hydroxide. In natural waters Cr( VI) is present principally as the chromate anion, CrO 4 2. Most surface waters naturally contain chromium levels ranging from 1 to 10

g/ L. Atlantic coastal river waters contain significantly higher concentrations of chromium than the Gulf and Pacific river waters, and the chromium concentration in seawater is less than that of river waters. The highest concentrations of chromium are usually found in waters draining industrial and urban areas.

Chromium ( III) is the most stable and most important oxidation state of the element. The chemistry of Cr( III) in aqueous solutions is coordination chemistry, and it is dominated by the formation of kinetically inert, octahedral complexes. The aqueous Cr( III) ion system is extremely complex. The trivalent chromium ion coordinates with almost all chelating agents and strong Lewis bases. When sufficient hydroxide is added to an aqueous solution of Cr( III) ion, a hydrous chromium( III) oxide ( Cr 2 O3 ° nH 2 O) of indefinite composition is precipitated. Commonly, this compound is mistakenly referred to as chromium( III) hydroxide.

The exact composition of Cr( VI) anion( s) present in aqueous solutions is a function of both pH and Cr( VI) concentration. However, at pH values above 8, virtually all of the Cr( VI) is present as the CrO 4 2

anion.

Only Cr( III) and Cr( VI) compounds are produced in large quantities accessible to most of the population. Therefore, the toxicology of chromium compounds has been historically limited to these two oxidation states. The EPA has set the National Primary Drinking Water Standard at 100

g/ L total chromium. Industrial and municipal discharges of Cr( III) and Cr( VI) are regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) permits. Current freshwater water quality criteria ( WQC) for Cr( III) are 570

g/ L ( acute) and 74

g/ L ( chronic), and for Cr( VI) the criteria are16

g/ L ( acute) and 11

g/ L ( chronic). These values constrain the levels of chromium that may be discharged to the nation's surface waters. EPA has established exposure levels for both Cr( III) and Cr( VI) for the general population. For exposures of short duration that constitute an insignificant fraction of the lifespan, the acceptable intake subchronic ( AIS) by ingestion is 979 mg/ d for trivalent chromium and 1.75 mg/ d for hexavalent chromium. Both the established exposure levels and the WQC clearly illustrate that Cr( VI) is much more toxic than Cr( III).

To meet ambientWQC for Cr( III) and/ or Cr( VI), industrial waste effluents are treated to remove chromium. Hexavelent chromium is reduced to trivalent chromium, which is then removed by precipitation. The pH of the aqueous solution is reduced to about 2.0 with hydrochloric or sulfuric acid; the aqueous pH controls the reaction rate, which is extremely slow above pH 3. Then, reducing agents such as sulfur dioxide and sodium metabisulfite are added. Lime or caustic soda is added to raise the pH and cause the precipitation of trivalent chromium. Precipitation is carried out at pH 8.5 9.5; in this range chromium hydroxide solubility is minimal. Trivalent chromium is treated simply by raising the pH with lime or soda to precipitate the hydroxy Cr( III) oxide. Removal efficiencies ( which are generally greater than 90 percent) may be improved by adding additional flocculating agents. About 80 percent of chromium can also be effectively removed from municipal waste water treatment effluents by activated sludge treatment. Abt Associates Inc. Insoluble inert chromium( III) oxide, Cr 2 O 3, is the stable mineral end product into which chromium compounds are converted in the environment as the result of natural processes. When trivalent chromium enters a surface water, it eventually precipitates as hydroxychromium( III) oxide in neutral pH regions. This compound ages and mineralizes, becoming increasingly insoluble and becoming incorporated in the sediments, with only a small proportion remaining in solution. When Cr( VI) compounds reach natural waters, they are eventually reduced to Cr( III) compounds by the natural organic matter present in the waters.

CONCLUSION In summary, the principal species of chromium found in natural surface waters is Cr( III). Lesser amounts of the more toxic Cr( VI) may be present, but eventually will be converted to Cr( III). The bottom sediments act as a sink for the eventual precipitates of chromium in an aqueous system. The material presented indicates that dissolved (  0.45 micron) Cr( III) best represents the principal bioavailable form of chromium in natural surface waters. Abt Associates Inc. GENERAL REFERENCES Clifford, D., S. Subrammian, and T. J. Sorg. 1986. Removing dissolved inorganic contaminants from water. Environ. Sci. Technol. 20( 11): 1072 1080.

Faust, S. D. and O. M. Aly. 1981. Chemistry of Natural Waters, Chpt. 7, Ann Arbor Science Publisher, Ann Arbor, MI.

Kirk Othmer. 1993. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 4th Ed. Vol. 6: Chromium Compounds. John Wiley and Son, N. Y., N. Y.

Manahan, S. E. 1972. Environmental Chemistry, Willard Grant Press, Boston, MA.

Gerhartz W( ed). 1986. Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry. 5th ed. Vol A7, Chromium compounds. Weinheim, N. Y., N. Y.

VanderLeeden, F., F. L. Troise, and D. K. Todd, 1990. The Water Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed. Lewis Publishers, Inc. Chelsea, MI. Abt Associates Inc. COPPER COMPOUNDS The most important oxidation states for copper are elemental copper ( Cu( 0)), cuprous copper ( Cu( I)), and cupric copper ( Cu( II)). In aqueous solutions Cu( I) is unstable and dissociates to Cu( II) and Cu( 0). Some cuprous complexes are stable, but are rarely encountered in natural waters. Therefore, the chemistry of copper dissolved in natural surface waters is essentially the chemistry of the more stable cupric or Cu( II) species. Dissolved copper is naturally found in freshwater surface waters at an average level of about 15

g/ L, with a range from 1

g/ L to 200

g/ L.

In aquatic environments the chemistry of Cu( II) is principally the chemistry of Cu( II) complexes. The percentage of freely dissolved cupric ion in solution is usually much less than 1 percent. Cu( II) readily complexes with dissolved natural organic matter ( NOM) and numerous inorganic species. The copper complex speciation, and hence bioavailability, is very much controlled by NOM concentration, pH, alkalinity, trace metal concentrations, and major cation concentrations.

EPA has proposed a National Primary Drinking Water Standard for total copper of 1.3 mg/ L. Industrial and municipal discharges of copper are regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) permits. Current Water Quality Criteria ( WQC) for copper are 13

g/ L ( acute) and 9

g/ L ( chronic) at a hardness of 100 ( the bioavailability of copper is hardness dependent). The criteria are for dissolved copper, and were generated using cupric salts in aquatic toxicity tests; thus, the criteria are for dissolved Cu( II). Because permit limits are based upon total copper, waste load allocation ( WLA) values based on the criteria must be translated from dissolved to total values for the discharger permit limits using a chemical translator, either a default value or a site specific value developed by the discharger. The translator reflects the fraction of dissolved Cu( II) relative to total copper in the discharger's effluent, which impacts bioavailability. For example, the state of Michigan default translator for copper is 1.5. If a discharger in Michigan has a calculated WLA of 50

g/ L based on the copper criteria, the discharger's permit limit would be 75

g/ L. Site specific criteria using water effect ratio ( WER) studies also can be developed, potentially allowing for greater discharges of copper than permitted by EPA's criteria. Copper WER values have been developed at some sites that allow for over a ten fold increase in copper discharges. The WER value reflects the bioavailable Cu( II) concentration in the combined effluent and receiving water matrix, and the intent of the copper WQC is to regulate this form of copper, rather than all copper species.

Copper is toxic in very low concentrations to most fungi, algae, and certain bacteria, and can be lethal to higher life forms in relatively high doses. The acute oral toxicity in humans ( LD 10) is 100 mg/ kg; in contrast, Cu( II) can be acutely toxic to aquatic organisms at the 13

g/ L level.

To achieve NPDES permit limits, industrial effluents can be treated to reduce copper by hydroxide or sulfide precipitation, or by a combination of the two processes. Good to very good removals ( 60 90 percent) can be achieved from industrial wastes. Removal of copper from municipal effluents at activated sludge plants is reported to be greater than 80 percent.

The biogeochemical cycling of Cu( II) is profoundly influenced by its speciation. The interaction of Cu( II) ions with humic substances influences the transport, bioavailability, and solubility in waters and sediments. Hydrolysis and precipitation reactions dominate the Cu( II) chemistry at pH values expected in most natural water systems, especially in the absence of significant levels of complexing compounds such as humic acids. A significant process by which Cu( II) is removed from aqueous solution is by precipitation of malachite ( CuCO 3, Cu( OH) 2). Cupric sulfide and cupric hydroxide also precipitate. Cu( II) also Abt Associates Inc. adsorbs to suspended particulate matter, which eventually settles out of the water column. Thus, the fate of most of the aqueous Cu( II) is to eventually migrate to the sediments, where further conversion to insoluble CuS and mineral forms such as malachite virtually sequesters the copper in the bottom sediments. On a global basis, less than 1 percent of the copper transported by rivers to the oceans is in the soluble form.

CONCLUSION Given that the chemistry of copper dissolved in natural surface waters is essentially the chemistry of Cu( II) species, dissolved (  0.45

M) Cu( II) best represents the principal bioavailable to be used in the RSEI model. Abt Associates Inc. GENERAL REFERENCES Clifford, D., S. Subrammian, and T. J. Sorg. 1986. Removing dissolved inorganic contaminants from water. Environ. Sci. Technol. 20( 11): 1072 1080.

Kirk Othmer. 1993. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 4th Ed. Vol. 6: Copper Compounds. John Wiley and Son, N. Y., N. Y.

Gerhartz W( ed). 1986. Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry, 5th ed. Vol A7, Copper compounds. Weinheim, N. Y. NY.

VanderLeeden, F., F. L. Troise, and D. K. Todd. 1990. The Water Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed. Lewis Publishers, Inc. Chelsea, MI.

Demayo, A., M. C. Taylor, and K. W. Taylor. 1982. Effects of copper on humans, animals, plants, and aquatic life. CRC Critical Reviews in Environmental Control. 12: 83. Abt Associates Inc. LEAD COMPOUNDS Lead is widely distributed in the crust of the earth, and is also found in the atmosphere and hydrosphere. Atmospheric fallout ( dry deposition) and rainout of particulate lead are considered significant sources of lead input into natural surface waters, especially in urban areas. Storm runoff can carry significant amounts of lead in solution, in addition to lead bearing sediments, into receiving waters. Generally, non urban areas with high storm runoff rates are less likely to contribute high lead loadings to surface waters because they are less likely to have high lead fallout rates; runoff originating in urban areas will tend to have high lead concentrations.

The chemical composition of runoff waters is an important factor in determining the concentration of dissolved lead. Runoff waters with a pH value near 6.5 and an alkalinity below 30 mg/ L ( as HCO  3 ) are expected to contain high concentrations of soluble lead, ranging from 40

g/ L up to several hundred

g/ L. However, waters with alkalinities exceeding 60 mg/ L and a pH value near 8.0 are expected to contain low concentrations of dissolved lead, generally below 10

g/ L.

The mean global natural lead concentrations of lakes and rivers is estimated to be 1 10

g/ L. The mean concentration of dissolved lead in surface waters of the United States has been reported to be 23

g/ L. Newer " clean technique" analytical methods, however, indicate that these older estimates are probably on the high side. Most lead in surface waters is present either as particulate lead compounds, or as lead adsorbed to suspended particulate matter.

The principal oxidation states for lead are Pb( 0), Pb( II) and Pb( IV). In natural surface waters, Pb( II) predominates, and the following species of lead can be found: Pb2+, PbCO 3, Pb( CO 3) 2 2, Pb( OH+), and Pb( OH) 2. The speciation of Pb( II) is dependent on pH and alkalinity, as well as the concentrations of any lead complexing agents in the waters. Industrial organo Pb( IV) compounds exist, but since the phasing out of lead antiknock additives for gasoline, the remaining organo lead compounds pose little pollution threat to surface waters in the U. S.

EPA has proposed a National Primary Drinking Water Standard for total lead of 0.05 mg/ L. Industrial and municipal discharges of lead are regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) permits. Current water quality ( WQC) criteria for lead are 65

g/ L ( acute) and 2.5

g/ L ( chronic) at a hardness of 100 ( lead criteria are hardness dependent). The criteria are for dissolved Pb( II), and were generated using lead( II) salts in aquatic toxicity tests. Because lead permit limits are for total lead, waste load allocation ( WLA) values based on the criteria must be translated for the discharge permit from dissolved to total values using a chemical translator, either a default value or a sitespecific translator developed by the discharger. The translator reflects the fraction of dissolved Pb( II) to total lead in the discharger's effluent. For example, the State on Michigan default translator for lead is 4.5. If a permit writer in Michigan has a calculated WLA of 50

g/ L, the discharger's permit limit would be 225

g/ L. Site specific criteria also can be developed using water effect ratio ( WER) studies, allowing for greater discharges of lead reflective of the bioavailability of lead in the receiving water/ effluent matrix. WER studies are important, because the intent of the WQC is to regulate the dissolved form of lead, rather than all lead species.

Lead is toxic in all forms, but to different degrees, depending upon the chemical nature and solubility of the lead compound. In general, organolead compounds are more toxic than inorganic lead salts if ingested, inhaled, or absorbed by humans. Children are more sensitive than adults to the effects of Abt Associates Inc. lead exposure. Such exposure may be acute ( a large single dose) or chronic ( repeated low doses). Prolonged absorption of lead should be avoided because there are many toxic effects which are cumulative, and severe.

To achieve permit limits, industrial waste effluents can be treated to reduce lead by hydroxide or sulfide precipitation, or by a combination of the processes. Very good removals ( greater than 90 percent) can be achieved in industrial waste waters. Removal of lead from municipal effluents by activated sludge treatment plants is reported to be greater than 60 percent.

The environmental fate of Pb( II) in aqueous systems in dominated by precipitation of Pb( CO 3), Pb( OH) 2, and Pb 3( OH) 2( CO 3) 2 ( and in the presence of sulfur under reducing conditions), PbS. Adsorption of Pb( II) to suspended matter, which ultimately settles, also removes lead from the water column. The important influence of pH on the solubility of lead in aqueous systems must be recognized. The solubility of lead is below 10

g/ L above pH 8.0, regardless of the alkalinity. However, in slightly acidic waters ( near pH 6.5) and with a low alkalinity, the solubility of lead could increase to values greater than 100

g/ L. Complexation with organic matter or inorganic colloids also influences lead solubility. Sediments are the ultimate " sink" for lead, where they are in mineralized forms ( PbS, galena).

CONCLUSION The material presented indicates that dissolved (  0.45 micron) Pb( II) best represents the principal bioavailable form of lead present in natural surface waters. Abt Associates Inc. GENERAL REFERENCES Clifford, D., S. Subrammian, and T. J. Sorg. 1986. Removing Dissolved Inorganic Contaminants From Water. Environ. Sci. Technol, 20( 11): 1072 1080.

Faust, S. D. and O. M. Aly. 1981. Chemistry of Natural Waters Chpt. 7, Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, MI.

Kirk Othmer. 1993. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 4th Ed. Vol 15: Lead Compounds. John Wiley and Son, N. Y. , NY.

Manahan, S. E. 1972. Environmental Chemistry, Willard Grant Press, Boston, MA.

Gerhartz W( ed). 1986. Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry. 5th ed. Vol A15, Lead Compounds. Weinheim, N. Y. NY.

VanderLeeden, F., F. L. Troise, and D. K. Todd, 1990. The Water Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed. Lewis Publishers, Inc. Chelsea, MI. Abt Associates Inc. CYANIDE COMPOUNDS Cyanide compounds, which can release the cyanide anion, ( CN) are differentiated into simple and complex cyanides. Simple cyanides have the formula A( CN) x, where A is an alkaline earth element or a metal, and x is the number of cyanide groups, such as NaCN. In solutions of simple metal cyanides, the CN group also can be found in the form of metal cyanide complexes ( e. g., Cu( CN) 3  and Ni( CN) 4  2). The metal cyanides may dissociate, depending on several factors. Some metal cyanide complexes such as zinc, nickel, copper and cadmium cyanide are easily dissociable under acidic conditions, and are classified as weak acid dissociable ( WAD) species. Other metal cyanides are strongly complexed and difficult to dissociate, such as cobalt and iron cyanide complexes.

The different types of cyanide species, free cyanide ( HCN and CN), WAD metal cyanide, strongly complexed metal cyanide, as well as other cyanide related compounds ( thiocyanate, cyanogen chloride and cyanate) differ considerably in their toxicity, reactivity, and environmental fate and transport. From an environmental effects perspective, the most toxicologically significant or ecologically important forms of cyanide are free and WAD cyanide.

Numerous cyanide species are found in water, but these species are not commonly identified and quantified. Rather, cyanide is typically measured as " total cyanide by distillation", which does not differentiate among forms of cyanide ( and excludes thiocyanate, cyanate, organocyanides, and some other cyanide forms). Because different forms of cyanide have different toxicity characteristics and physicochemical properties, total cyanide analytical data have limitations in risk assessments, in evaluating cyanide fate and transport in the aquatic environment and in developing treatment processes. Analytical methods that focus on cyanide species and groups of species have been developed, but are used relatively infrequently, in part because of concern about the ability of these methods to achieve low ( ppb level) detection limits in the complex matrices relevant to water quality management.

In natural waters hydrolysis of the CN ion produces HCN, a weak acid. In most surface waters HCN predominates; at pH levels of 7.5 or less, essentially all of the free cyanide is present as HCN. However, at pH levels of 8.0, only about 5 percent of the cyanide is present as the CN ion.

The toxicity of cyanide compounds is well known. In the aquatic environment HCN has been shown to be the most toxic of the cyanide species. Industrial and municipal effluent discharges of cyanide are regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES). Current water quality ( WQC) criteria for cyanide are 22

g/ L ( acute) and 5.2

g/ L ( chronic), expressed as free cyanide. These limits constrain the levels of cyanide that may be discharged to the nation's surface waters. A tentative Drinking Water Standard of 0.2 mg/ L has been established by EPA. Ingestion of cyanide, unless prompt first aid or medical treatment is given, can be rapidly fatal at concentrations of approximately 1mg of cyanide per kilogram of body weight.

Whenever cyanide is manufactured or used, effluents and wastes containing various amounts of cyanide are produced. Because of the high toxicity of cyanide to all forms of life, the effluents and wastes must be treated to reduce the cyanide concentrations to achieve the required discharge level. Alkaline chlorination is the process most frequently used to treat effluents containing less than 1 g CN  per liter. In principle, this method destroys all of the commercially used simple and complex cyanides, with the exception of complex iron cyanides, which are only attacked at temperatures above 80  C. The treatment can be carried out with chlorine and alkali [ NaOH, Ca( OH) 2] or with ready made hypochlorite solutions Abt Associates Inc. that contain about 12 percent NaOCl. At first, toxic cyanogen chloride is formed, which hydrolyzes quickly to cyanate and chloride at pH > 11. The cyanate may be oxidized further to nitrogen and carbonate by using excess hypochlorite. Hydrogen peroxide use for cyanide detoxification has increased in recent years because, in this case, the oxidation of cyanide leads directly to cyanate without forming toxic intermediates and byproducts; in addition, hydrogen peroxide does not cause additional salting.

Complexed cyanides in natural waters may revert to free cyanide through hydrolysis reactions, or in certain instances photolytic reactions ( iron cyanide complex). However, the reactions are slow, and the HCN formed follows the same fate paths available to all free cyanide in surface waters:

° Loss to the atmosphere ° Biological ( bacterial) oxidation ° Complexation with iron to form very stable, non toxic compounds ° Polymerization CONCLUSION The material presented indicates that free cyanide ( HCN and CN) best represents the principal bioavailable form( s) of cyanide present in natural surface waters. Abt Associates Inc. GENERAL REFERENCES Clesari, L. S., A. E. Greenberg, and R. R. Trussell ( eds). 1989. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 17th Ed. APHA, Washington, D. C.

Kirk Othmer. 1993. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 4th Ed. Vol. 7: Cyanide Compounds. John Wiley and Son, N. Y., N. Y.

Gerhartz W( ed). 1986. Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry. 5th ed. Vol. A8, Cyanide compounds. Weinheim, N. Y., N. Y.

Zheng, A and D. A. Dzombak. 2003. Evaluation and Testing of Analytical Methods for Cyanide Species in Municipal and Industrial Contaminated Waters. Environ. Sci. Technol. 37: 107 115. Abt Associates Inc. MERCURY COMPOUNDS Mercury is a toxic, persistent, bioaccumulative pollutant. Most of the mercury in natural surface waters is in the form of inorganic mercury salts and organic forms of mercury ( e. g., methylmercury). Mercury accumulates very efficiently in the aquatic food web, and nearly all of the mercury that accumulates in fish tissue is methylmercury.

Mercury can exist in three oxidation states: Hg0 ( elemental), Hg 2 2+( mercurous), and Hg2+( mercuric Hg( II)). The properties and chemical behavior of mercury strongly depend on the oxidation state. Mercurous and mercuric mercury can form numerous inorganic and organic compounds; however, mercurous mercury is rarely stable under ordinary environmental conditions. Mercury is unusual among metals, because it tends to form covalent rather than ionic bonds. Most of the mercury encountered in all environmental media, except the atmosphere, is in the form of inorganic mercuric salts and organomercury compounds. Organomercurics are defined by the presence of a covalent C Hg bond, which differentiates organomercurics from inorganic mercury compounds that merely associate with the organic material in the environment but do not have the C Hg bond. The compounds most likely to be found under environmental conditions are the mercuric salts, HgCl 2, Hg( OH) 2 and HgS; methylmercury compounds, methylmercuric chloride ( CH 3 HgCl), and methylmercuric hydroxide ( CH 3 HgOH); and, in small fractions, other organomercurics ( i. e., dimethylmercury and phenylmercury). Mercuric and organomercuric ions undergo rapid hydrolysis to form the corresponding hydroxides. Mercury compounds in the aqueous phase often remain as undissociated molecules, and the reported solubility values reflect this. The dissociation tendencies of mercuric compounds ( HgX 2 or RHgX) depend on the nature of the ligand X ¯ :

F ¯ > OCOCH 3 ¯ > HPO 4 2  Cl ¯ > Br ¯ > NH 3> OH ¯ > SR ¯ > S2

The thiol and sulfide compounds are particularly stable and, therefore, have low tendencies to dissociate. Solubility values for mercury compounds which do not dissociate are not based on the ionic product. Most organomercurics are not soluble, and do not react with weak acids or bases due to the low affinity of mercury for oxygen bonded to carbon. CH 3 HgOH, however, is highly soluble due to the strong hydrogen bonding capability of the hydroxide group. The mercuric salts vary widely in solubility. For example, HgCl 2 is readily soluble in water, and HgS is as unreactive as the organomercurics due to the high affinity of mercury for sulfur.

There are a number of pathways by which mercury can enter the freshwater environment. Hg( II) and methylmercury from atmospheric deposition ( wet and dry) can enter water bodies directly; Hg( II) and methylmercury can be transported to water bodies in runoff ( bound to suspended soil/ humus or attached to dissolved organic carbon); or Hg( II) and methylmercury can leach into the water body from groundwater flow in the upper soil layers. Once in the freshwater system, mercury will be complexed and transformed as with mercury species in soil, with additional processes involved due to the aqueous environment, such as partitioning to suspended matter, photolysis reactions, and biotransformation and biomagnification in the food web. Mercury concentrations are typically reported for particular components of the water environment, the most common of which are the water column ( further partitioned as dissolved or attached to suspended material), the underlying sediment ( further divided into surface sediments and deep sediments); and biota ( particularly fish).

Partition coefficients have been calculated to describe the relative affinity of Hg( II) and Abt Associates Inc. methylmercury for sediment over water. Values of the partition coefficient K d ( concentration of mercury in dry sediment or suspended matter divided by the dissolved concentration in water) on the order of 100,000 ml/ g sediment and 100,000+ ml/ g suspended material are typically found for Hg( II) and methylmercury, indicating a strong preference for Hg( II) and methylmercury to remain bound to bottom sediment or suspended matter ( the affinity highest for methylmercury). A river or lake freshwater system has a larger volume of water than sediment, and a significant amount of Hg( II) entering a system may partition to the water column, especially if there is a high concentration of suspended material in the water column. It is often unclear whether the mercury in sediment will be found as HgCl 2 or Hg( OH) 2 organic complexes, which are more susceptible to methylation ( addition of a methyl group to form methylmercury), or will be the more unreactive HgS and HgO forms.

Most of the mercury in the water column ( Hg( II) and methylmercury) will be bound to organic matter, either to dissolved organic carbon ( DOC; consisting of fulvic and humic acids, carbohydrates, carboxylic acids, amino acids and hydrocarbons), or to suspended particulate matter. In most cases, studies that refer to the dissolved mercury in water include mercury complexes with DOC. Studies indicate that about 25 60 percent of Hg( II) and methylmercury organic complexes are particle bound in the water column, with the rest in the dissolved and DOC bound phase. Typically, total mercury and methylmercury concentrations are positively correlated with DOC concentrations in lake waters.

Hg0 is produced in freshwater by humic acid reduction of Hg( II), or demethylation of methylmercury mediated by sunlight. A portion will remain in the dissolved gaseous state, while most will volatilize. As noted previously, Hg0 constitutes very little of the total mercury in the water column, but may provide a significant pathway for the evolution of mercury out of the water body via Hg( II) or methylmercury > Hg0 > volatilization. For many lakes, however, sedimentation of the Hg( II) and methylmercury bound to particulate matter is the dominant process for removal of mercury from the water column.

Generally, no more than 25 percent of the total mercury in the water column exists as a methylmercury complex; typically, less than 10% is observed. The water column methylmercury concentration is a result of methylation of Hg( II) in the bottom sediments and the water column, by microbial action and abiotic processes. Methylmercury in the water column which is lost through demethylation, exported downstream, or taken up by biota, is thought to be replaced by additional methylation of Hg( II) compounds to sustain equilibrium.

Mercury can enter surface water as Hg0, Hg2+, or methylmercury. Once in aquatic systems, mercury can exist in dissolved or particulate forms, and can undergo the following transformations.

° Hg 0 in surface waters can be oxidized to Hg2+, or volatilized to the atmosphere. ° Hg2+ can be methylated in sediments and the water column to form methylmercury. ° Methylmercury can be alkylated to form dimethylmercury. ° Hg2+ and methylmercury can form organic and inorganic complexes with sediments and suspended particulate matter.

Each of these reactions are also possible in the reverse direction. The net rate of production of each mercury species is determined by the balance between the forward and reverse reactions.

The U. S. Geological Survey National Pilot Study of Mercury Contamination found the mean methylmercury concentration in surface water to be 0.15 ng/ L. Total mercury concentrations were ten to Abt Associates Inc. one hundred times higher. In contrast, a methylmercury concentration of 0.07 ng/ L in the nation's surface waters has been predicted by computer simulation, and more than 80 percent of the total mercury in the water column was predicted to be inorganic divalent species. The fraction of the predicted background concentration as methylmercury was 7.8 percent.

EPA has proposed a National Primary Drinking Water Standard for total mercury of 0.002 mg/ L. Industrial and municipal discharges of mercury are regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) permits. Current water quality ( WQC) criteria ( aquatic life) for mercury are 1.4

g/ L ( acute) and 0.77

g/ L ( chronic) at a hardness of 100 ( mercury criteria are hardness dependent). The mercury aquatic life criteria are for total dissolved mercury, and were generated using mercury salts in aquatic toxicity tests; thus, the criteria are for total dissolved Hg( II). Permit limits are for total mercury; therefore waste load allocation ( WLA) values based on the criteria must be translated form dissolved to total values for the discharger's permit using a chemical translator, either a default value or a site specific one developed by the discharger. EPA has provided the following " default" translators for use in the permitting of mercury:

Summary of Mercury Translators for Mercury in Water fd ( fraction dissolved) value Lentic ( static waters) Lotic ( flowing waters)

fd Hg dissolved/ Hg total 0.598 0.370 fd Me Hg dissolved/ Hg total 0.032 0.014 fd Me Hg dissolved/ Me Hg total 0.613 0.490 The translators can also be applied to derive default concentrations of dissolved Hg( II) and methylmercury from total Hg values. For example, for a total Hg concentration of 1 ng/ L, a predicted dissolved Hg( II) concentration of 0.598 ng/ L and dissolved methylmercury of 0.032 ng/ L can be calculated.

Methylmercury is by far the most toxic form of mercury, and EPA has established a water quality criterion for protection of human health for methylmercury. The primary source of human exposure to methylmercury is through consumption of contaminated fish and seafood. EPA has therefore established a fish tissue based criterion for methylmercury, the value of which is 0.3 mg methylmercury / kg in fish tissue.

To achieve permit limits, industrial waste effluents can be treated to reduce the concentration of mercury. Mercury can be removed by hydroxide or sulfide precipitation, or by a combination of the two processes. Very good removals (> 90 percent) can be achieved. Removal of mercury from municipal influents at activated sludge plants is reported to be ~ 80 percent. Ferric sulfate coagulation can be used to remove mercury from drinking water sources.

To understand the fate of mercury requires recognitation that once entering a water body, mercury can remain in the water column, be lost through drainage water, revolatilize into the atmosphere, settle into the sediment or be taken up by aquatic biota. After entering the aquatic environment, the movements of mercury through any specific water body may be unique. Mercury in the water column, in the sediment, and in other aquatic biota appears to be available to aquatic organisms for uptake. Sediments are the principal sink for mercury.

Methylation is a key step in the entrance of mercury into the food chain. Inorganic mercury species Abt Associates Inc. can be biotransformed to methylated organic species in water bodies in both the sediment and the water column. Abiotic processes ( e. g., humic and fulvic acids in solution) also appear to methylate the mercuric ion. Not all mercury compounds entering an aquatic ecosystem are methylated, and demethylation reactions as well as volatilization of dimethylmercury decrease the amount of methylmercury available in the aquatic environment. There is a large degree of uncertainty and variability concerning the processes that methylate mercury in aquatic environments.

Methylmercury is very bioavailable, and accumulates in fish through the aquatic food web; nearly 100% of the mercury found in fish muscle tissue is methylated. Methylmercury appears to be primarily passed to planktivorous and piscivorous fish via their diet. Larger, longer lived fish species at the upper end of the food chain typically have the highest concentrations of methylmercury in a given water body. A relationship exists between methylmercury concentrations in fish and lake pH, with higher methylmercury concentrations in fish tissue typically found in more acidic lakes. The mechanisms for this behavior are unclear. Most of the total methylmercury production is incorporated in biota, particularly fish. In fact, bioconcentration factors ( BCFs) for accumulation of methylmercury in fish are on the order of 105 106. Bioaccumlation of methylmercury in fish muscle tissue has been documented in water bodies that are remote from emission sources and seemingly pristine, as well as in water bodies that are less isolated. Methylmercury appears to be efficiently passed through the aquatic food web to the highest trophic level consumers in the community ( e. g., piscivorous fish). At this point methylmercury can be ingested by fish consuming wildlife and humans, where it appears to pass from the gastrointestinal tract into the bloodstream more efficiently than the divalent species.

CONCLUSION The material presented indicates that dissolved (  0.45 micron) Hg( II) and dissolved methylmercury best represent the principal bioavailable forms of mercury present in natural surface waters. Abt Associates Inc. GENERAL REFERENCES Clifford, D., S. Subrammian, and T. J. Sorg. 1986. Removing Dissolved Inorganic Contaminants From Water. Environ. Sci. Technol, 20( 11): 1072 1080.

Faust, S. D. and O. M. Aly. 1981. Chemistry of Natural Water, Chpt. 7, Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, MI.

U. S. EPA. 1997. Mercury study report to Congress. Vol. III. Fate and transport of mercury in the environment. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. December 1997. EPA 452/ R97 005.

U. S. EPA. 1997. Mercury study report to Congress. Vol. VI. Fate and transport of mercury in the environment. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. December 1997. EPA 452/ R97 008.

U. S. EPA. 2001. Water quality criterion for the protection of human health: methylmercury. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. January 2001. EPA 823 R 01 001.


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 42 (Tuesday, March 3, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12565-12567]
[FR Doc No: 2020-04362]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket Nos. FDA-2018-E-2615 and FDA-2018-E-2616]

Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent
Extension; ILUMYA

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) has
determined the regulatory review period for ILUMYA and is publishing
this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the
determination because of the submission of applications to the Director
of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Department of
Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that human
biological product.

DATES: Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (see
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section) are incorrect may submit either
electronic or written comments and ask for a redetermination by May 4,
2020. Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a
determination regarding whether the applicant for

extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period
by August 31, 2020. See ``Petitions'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section for more information.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before May 4, 2020. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of May 4, 2020. Comments received by
mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket Nos.
FDA-2018-E-2615 and FDA-2018-E-2616 ``For Determination of Regulatory
Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; ILUMYA.'' Received
comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be
placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential
Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at
the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with Sec.  10.20 (21 CFR 10.20) and
other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's
posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18,
2015, or access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory
Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984
(Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term
Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may
be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item
(human drug product, animal drug product, medical device, food
additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA
before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory
review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension
an applicant may receive.
    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A
testing phase and an approval phase. For human biological products, the
testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical
investigations of the biological product becomes effective and runs
until the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the
initial submission of an application to market the human biological
product and continues until FDA grants permission to market the
biological product. Although only a portion of a regulatory review
period may count toward the actual amount of extension that the
Director of USPTO may award (for example, half the testing phase must
be subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the
patent was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory
review period for a human biological product will include all of the
testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C.
156(g)(1)(B).
    FDA has approved for marketing the human biologic product ILUMYA
(tildrakizumab (tildrakizumab-asmn)). ILUMYA is indicated for the
treatment of adults with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis who are
candidates for systemic therapy or phototherapy. Subsequent to this
approval, the USPTO received patent term restoration applications for
ILUMYA (U.S. Patent Nos. 8,293,883 and 8,404,813) from Merck Sharp &
Dohme Corp., and the USPTO requested FDA's assistance in determining
the patents' eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated
September 18, 2018, FDA advised the USPTO that this human biological
product had undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval
of ILUMYA represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use
of the product. Thereafter, the USPTO

requested that FDA determine the product's regulatory review period.

II. Determination of Regulatory Review Period

    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for
ILUMYA is 3,452 days. Of this time, 3,089 days occurred during the
testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 363 days occurred
during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the
following dates:
    1. The date an exemption under section 505(i) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) became effective: October 8,
2008. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that the date the
investigational new drug application became effective was on October 8,
2008.
    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to
the human biological product under section 351 of the Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262): March 23, 2017. FDA has verified the
applicant's claim that the biologics license application (BLA) for
ILUMYA (BLA 761067) was initially submitted on March 23, 2017.
    3. The date the application was approved: March 20, 2018. FDA has
verified the applicant's claim that BLA 761067 was approved on March
20, 2018.
    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the
maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO
applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual
period for patent extension. In its applications for patent extension,
this applicant seeks 1,149 days or 1,092 days of patent term extension.

III. Petitions

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are
incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and, under
21 CFR 60.24, ask for a redetermination (see DATES). Furthermore, as
specified in Sec.  60.30 (21 CFR 60.30), any interested person may
petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for
extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period.
To meet its burden, the petition must comply with all the requirements
of Sec.  60.30, including but not limited to: Must be timely (see
DATES), must be filed in accordance with Sec.  10.20, must contain
sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation, and must certify that a
true and complete copy of the petition has been served upon the patent
applicant. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42,
1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.
    Submit petitions electronically to https://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FDA-2013-S-0610. Submit written petitions (two copies are
required) to the Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Dated: February 27, 2020.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-04362 Filed 3-2-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 96 (Friday, May 17, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22364-22365]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10173]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2019-0036; Airspace Docket No. 19-ACE-1]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Charleston, MO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at Charleston, Mississippi County Airport in
Charleston, MO. This action is due to the decommissioning of the
Charleston non-directional radio beacon (NDB).

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, August 15, 2019. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1
Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11C at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Witucki, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Charleston, Mississippi County Airport, in support of
standard instrument approach procedures for IFR.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (84 FR 5392; February 21, 2019) for Docket No. FAA-2019-0036
to amend Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Charleston, Mississippi County Airport. Interested parties
were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting
written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11C, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15,
2018, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15,
2018. FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by: Modifying the Class E airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 6.3-mile radius of Charleston-
Mississippi County Airport, Charleston, MO, and removing the extension
within 2.6 miles each side of the 190[deg] bearing from the Charleston
NDB. This action was necessary due to the decommissioning of the
Charleston NDB. This action enhances safety and the management of IFR
operations at the airport.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5.a. This airspace action is not expected
to cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11C,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and
effective September 15, 2018, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ACE MO E5 Charleston, MO [Amended]

Mississippi County Airport, MO
    (Lat. 36[deg]50'32'' N, long. 89[deg]21'35'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.3-mile radius of Mississippi County Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on May 9, 2019.
John Witucki,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2019-10173 Filed 5-16-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 72 (Thursday, April 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 22155]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08392]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Correction--cancellation of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee meeting. The
notice was previously published (81 FR 18933) in the April 1, 2016
issue of the Federal Register.

DATES: The meeting to be cancelled was to be held on April 20, 2016--
9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting was to be held at the Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Round Room (10th Floor),
Washington, DC 20591.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chinita A. Roundtree-Coleman at (609)
485-7149 or Web site at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C. App. 2), notice is
hereby given of a meeting cancellation of the Research, Engineering and
Development (RE&D) Advisory Committee. The meeting agenda will include
receiving from the Committee guidance for FAA's research and
development investments in the areas of air traffic services, airports,
aircraft safety, human factors and environment and energy. Attendance
is open to the interested public but seating is limited. With the
approval of the chairman, members of the public may present oral
statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to attend the meeting,
present statements, or obtain information should contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the
public may present a written statement to the Committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC on April 6, 2016.
Chinita A. Roundtree-Coleman,
Computer Specialist.
[FR Doc. 2016-08392 Filed 4-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P