Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2004 / Proposed Rules 59153

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that the proposed regulation: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

the DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 

1979); 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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD. See the ADDRESSES

section for a location to examine the 

regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows:

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD):

Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2004–19228; 

Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–77–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) must receive comments on this AD 

action by November 18, 2004. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None.

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to all Boeing Model 

707–100 long body, –200, –100B long body, 

and –100B short body series airplanes; and 

Model 707–300, –300B, –300C, and –400 

airplanes; and Model 720 and 720B series 

airplanes; certificated in any category. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD was prompted by reports of inservice cracking of the support ribs for the 

main landing gear (MLG) trunnion. We are 

proposing this AD to detect and correct 

corrosion and cracking of the support ribs for 

the MLG trunnion, which could result in 

collapse of the MLG. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Service Bulletin References 

(f) The term ‘‘alert service bulletin,’’ as 

used in this AD, means the Accomplishment 

Instructions of Boeing 707 Alert Service 

Bulletin A3510, dated January 15, 2004. 

Repetitive Detailed Inspection and 

Corrective Action 

(g) Within 6 months after the effective date 

of this AD: Do a detailed inspection for 

corrosion and cracking of the left and right 

support ribs of the MLG trunnion. Do the 

inspection in accordance with all of the 

actions in Part I of the alert service bulletin. 

Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals 

not to exceed 6 months. 

(h) If any corrosion or cracking is found 

during any inspection required by paragraph 

(g) of this AD: Before further flight, do all 

applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions, and the other specified 

actions, in accordance with the alert service 

bulletin; except, where the alert service 

bulletin specifies to contact Boeing, before 

further flight, repair in accordance with a 

method approved by the Manager, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or 

in accordance with data meeting the type 

certification basis of the airplane approved 

by a Boeing Designated Engineering 

Representative (DER) who has been 

authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to 

make such findings. For a repair method to 

be approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO, as 

required by this paragraph, the approval 

letter must specifically reference this AD. 

Repetitive High Frequency Eddy Current 

(HFEC) Inspection and Corrective Action 

(i) Within 12 months after the effective 

date of this AD: Do a HFEC inspection for 

cracking of the left and right support ribs of 

the MLG trunnion. Do the inspection in 

accordance with all of the actions in Part II 

of the alert service bulletin. Repeat the 

inspection thereafter at intervals not to 

exceed 12 months. 

(j) If cracking is found during any 

inspection required by paragraph (i) of this 

AD: Before further flight, repair the cracked 

area in accordance with a method approved 

by the Manager, Seattle ACO; or in 

accordance with data meeting the type 

certification basis of the airplane approved 

by a Boeing DER who has been authorized by 

the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make such 

findings. For a repair method to be approved, 

the approval must specifically refer to this 

AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(k)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested in accordance with the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(2) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD, if it is approved by a 

Boeing Company DER who has been 

authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to 

make those findings. For a repair method to 

be approved, the approval must specifically 

refer to this AD.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 27, 2004. 

Kalene C. Yanamura, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–22268 Filed 10–1–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2004–19227; Directorate 

Identifier 2003–NM–95–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model 

A300 B2 and B4 Series Airplanes; 

Model A300 B4–600, A300 B4–600R, 

C4–605R Variant F, and A300 F4–600R 

(Collectively Called A300–600) Series 

Airplanes; and Model A310 Series 

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to 

supersede an existing airworthiness 

directive (AD) that applies to certain 

Airbus Model A300 B2 and B4 series 

airplanes; Model A300 B4–600, A300 

B4–600R, C4–605R Variant F, and A300 

F4–600R (collectively called A300–600) 

series airplanes; and Model A310 series 

airplanes. The existing AD currently 

requires replacement of the transformer 

rectifier units (TRUs) in the avionics 

compartment with new, improved 

TRUs. This proposed AD would require 

replacement of the TRUs installed 

according to the existing AD with 

different TRUs that are improved. This 

proposed AD is prompted by analysis 

that has revealed that certain diodes 

installed in the TRUs are the main factor 

contributing to the continuing TRU 

failures. We are proposing this AD to 

prevent failure of the TRUs. Failure of 

multiple TRUs could result in loss of 

the thrust reversers, autothrottle, flaps, 

and various systems (wing/cockpit 

window anti-ice, trim tank pumps, and 

windshield wipers) on the airplane; or 

display of incorrect information to the 

flightcrew.

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by November 3, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following 

addresses to submit comments on this 

proposed AD. 

• DOT Docket Web site: Go to http:/

/dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions 

59154 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

for sending your comments 

electronically. 

• Government-wide rulemaking Web 

site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov

and follow the instructions for sending 

your comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 

Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building, 

room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on 

the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 

400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Airbus, 1 

Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 

Blagnac Cedex, France. 

You can examine the contents of this 

AD docket on the Internet at http://

dms.dot.gov, or at the Docket 

Management Facility, U.S. Department 

of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street 

SW., room PL–401, on the plaza level of 

the Nassif Building, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim 

Backman, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2797; 

fax (425) 227–1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Docket Management System (DMS) 

The FAA has implemented new 

procedures for maintaining AD dockets 

electronically. As of May 17, 2004, new 

AD actions are posted on DMS and 

assigned a docket number. We track 

each action and assign a corresponding 

directorate identifier. The DMS AD 

docket number is in the form ‘‘Docket 

No. FAA–2004–99999.’’ The Transport 

Airplane Directorate identifier is in the 

form ‘‘Directorate Identifier 2004–NM–

999–AD.’’ Each DMS AD docket also 

lists the directorate identifier (‘‘Old 

Docket Number’’) as a cross-reference 

for searching purposes. 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to submit any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments 

regarding this proposed AD. Send your 

comments to an address listed under 

ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–

2004–19227; Directorate Identifier 

2003–NM–95–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of the proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend the 

proposed AD in light of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

dms.dot.gov, including any personal 

information you provide. We will also 

post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact with FAA 

personnel concerning this proposed AD. 

Using the search function of our docket 

web site, anyone can find and read the 

comments in any of our dockets, 

including the name of the individual 

who sent the comment (or signed the 

comment on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You can 

review the DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78), or you can visit http://

dms.dot.gov.

We are reviewing the writing style we 

currently use in regulatory documents. 

We are interested in your comments on 

whether the style of this document is 

clear, and your suggestions to improve 

the clarity of our communications that 

affect you. You can get more 

information about plain language at 

http://www.faa.gov/language and http://

www.plainlanguage.gov.

Examining the Docket 

You can examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov, or in 

person at the Docket Management 

Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The Docket 

Management Facility office (telephone 

(800) 647–5227) is located on the plaza 

level of the Nassif Building at the DOT 

street address stated in the ADDRESSES

section. Comments will be available in 

the AD docket shortly after the DMS 

receives them. 

Discussion 

On August 31, 2000, we issued AD 

2000–18–07, amendment 39–11892 (65 

FR 54407, September 8, 2000), for 

certain Airbus Model A300, A300–600, 

and A310 series airplanes. That AD 

requires replacement of the transformer 

rectifier units (TRUs) in the avionics 

compartment with new, improved TRUs 

(having part number (P/N) F11QY3121). 

That AD was prompted by issuance of 

mandatory continuing airworthiness 

information by a foreign civil 

airworthiness authority. We issued that 

AD to prevent failure of the TRUs. 

Failure of multiple TRUs could result in 

loss of the thrust reversers, autothrottle, 

flaps, and various systems (wing/

cockpit window anti-ice, trim tank 

pumps, and windshield wipers) on the 

airplane; or incorrect information being 

displayed to the flightcrew. 

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued 

Since we issued AD 2000–18–07, the 

Direction Ge ́ne ́rale de l’Aviation Civile 

(DGAC), which is the airworthiness 

authority for France, has informed the 

FAA that failures have continued to 

occur on the TRUs having P/N 

F11QY3121, which were installed 

according to French airworthiness 

directive 1999–435–296(B), dated 

November 3, 1999. (French 

airworthiness directive 1999–435–

296(B) is the parallel French 

airworthiness directive to AD 2000–18–

07.) Analysis of these failures by the 

airplane manufacturer has revealed that 

certain diodes installed in the TRUs 

having P/N F11QY3121 are the main 

factor contributing to the continuing 

TRU failures. 

Relevant Service Information 

Airbus has issued Service Bulletins 

A300–24–0099, A300–24–6082, and 

A310–24–2088, all Revision 01, all 

dated December 18, 2003. These service 

bulletins describe procedures for 

replacing existing TRUs, having P/N 

F11QY3121, with new, improved TRUs, 

having P/N F11QY3714. Accomplishing 

the actions specified in the service 

information is intended to adequately 

address the unsafe condition. The 

DGAC mandated the service information 

and issued French airworthiness 

directive 2003–082R1, dated March 31, 

2004, to ensure the continued 

airworthiness of these airplanes in 

France. 

The Airbus service bulletins refer to 

Thales Service Bulletin F11QY3121–24–

003, dated October 15, 2002, as an 

additional source of service information 

for modifying the existing TRUs to the 

improved configuration. Thales Service 

Bulletin F11QY3121–24–003 specifies 

that Thales Service Bulletins 

F11QY3121–24–001, dated February 2, 

1998; and F11QY3121–24–002, dated 

October 5, 2000; must be done prior to 

or concurrent with Thales Service 

Bulletin F11QY3121–24–003. Those 

service bulletins modify TRUs having P/

N F11QY3121 to include Amendments 

A and B, respectively. Thales Service 

Bulletin F11QY3121–24–003 modifies 

TRU P/Ns F11QY3121 with 

Amendments A and B, to P/N 

F11QY3714 (which is the P/N for the 

improved parts that the Airbus service 

bulletins recommend installing). 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

These airplane models are 

manufactured in France and are type 

certificated for operation in the United 

States under the provisions of section 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2004 / Proposed Rules 59155

21.29 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the 

applicable bilateral airworthiness 

agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral 

airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has 

kept the FAA informed of the situation 

described above. We have examined the 

DGAC’s findings, evaluated all pertinent 

information, and determined that AD 

action is necessary for airplanes of this 

type design that are certificated for 

operation in the United States. 

Therefore, we are proposing this AD, 

which would supersede AD 2000–18–07 

to require replacing existing TRUs with 

new, improved TRUs. The proposed AD 

would require you to use the Airbus 

service information described 

previously to perform these actions. 

Difference Between the French 

Airworthiness Directive and This 

Proposed AD 

The applicability of French 

airworthiness directive 2003–082R1 

excludes airplanes on which Airbus 

Service Bulletin A300–24–0099 (for 

Model A300 B2 and B4 series airplanes), 

A300–24–6082 (for Model A300–600 

series airplanes), or A310–24–2088 (for 

Model A310 series airplanes), has been 

accomplished in service. However, we 

have not excluded those airplanes from 

the applicability of this proposed AD. 

Rather, this proposed AD would include 

a requirement to accomplish the actions 

specified in those service bulletins. 

Such a requirement ensures that the 

actions specified in the service bulletins 

and that would be required by this 

proposed AD are accomplished on all 

affected airplanes. Operators must 

continue to operate the airplane in the 

configuration that would be required by 

this proposed AD unless an alternative 

method of compliance is approved. 

Clarification of Inspections Referenced 

in Thales Service Bulletin 

The Accomplishment Instructions of 

Thales Service Bulletin F11QY3121–24–

003 specify to ‘‘complete 

implementation of the [Service 

Information Letter] SIL F11QY3121–24–

004.’’ We reviewed that Thales Service 

Information Letter (SIL), which contains 

recommendations about TRU overhaul. 

We have coordinated this issue with 

Airbus, and they have clarified that it 

was not their intent to require the 

recommendations in the SIL. Therefore, 

this proposed AD does not require doing 

the SIL.

Explanation of Change to Applicability 

We have revised the applicability of 

the existing AD to identify model 

designations as published in the most 

recent type certificate data sheet for the 

affected models. 

Costs of Compliance 

This proposed AD would affect about 

165 airplanes of U.S. registry. 

The new proposed actions would take 

about 2 work hours per airplane, at an 

average labor rate of $65 per work hour. 

The parts manufacturer would provide 

required parts free of charge. Based on 

these figures, the estimated cost of the 

new actions specified in this proposed 

AD for U.S. operators is $21,450, or 

$130 per airplane. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this 

proposed AD would not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This proposed AD would not 

have a substantial direct effect on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that the proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); 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. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD. See the ADDRESSES

section for a location to examine the 

regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows:

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

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by 

removing 39–11892 (65 FR 54407, 

September 8, 2000) and adding the 

following new airworthiness directive 

(AD):

Airbus: Docket No. FAA–2004–19227; 

Directorate Identifier 2003–NM–95–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The Federal Aviation Administration 

must receive comments on this AD action by 

November 3, 2004. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2000–18–07, 

amendment 39–11892. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Model A300 B2 and 

B4 series airplanes; Model A300 B4–600, 

A300 B4–600R, C4–605R Variant F, and 

A300 F4–600R (collectively called A300–

600) series airplanes; and Model A310 series 

airplanes; certificated in any category; except 

those on which Airbus Modification 12540 

has been accomplished. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD was prompted by analysis that 

has revealed that certain diodes installed in 

the transformer rectifier units (TRUs) are the 

main factor contributing to the continuing 

TRU failures. We are issuing this AD to 

prevent failure of multiple TRUs, which 

could result in loss of the thrust reversers, 

autothrottle, flaps, and various systems 

(wing/cockpit window anti-ice, trim tank 

pumps, and windshield wipers) on the 

airplane; or display of incorrect information 

to the flightcrew. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Replacement of TRUs 

(f) Within 36 months after the effective 

date of this AD, replace the existing TRUs, 

having P/N F11QY3121, in the avionics 

compartment with new, improved TRUs 

having P/N F11QY3714, according to the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus 

Service Bulletin A300–27–0099 (for Model 

A300 B2 and B4 series airplanes), A300–24–

6082 (for Model A300–600 series airplanes), 

or A310–24–2088 (for Model A310 series 

airplanes); all Revision 01; all dated 

December 18, 2003; as applicable.

Note 1: Airbus Service Bulletin A300–27–

0099, A300–24–6082, or A310–24–2088; all 

Revision 01; refer to Thales Service Bulletin 

F11QY3121–24–003, dated October 15, 2002, 

as an additional source of service information 

for modifying the existing TRUs to the 

improved configuration. Thales Service 

Bulletin F11QY3121–24–003 specifies that 

Thales Service Bulletins F11QY3121–24–

001, dated February 2, 1998; and 

F11QY3121–24–002, dated October 5, 2000; 

must be done to add Amendments A and B, 

respectively, to P/N F11QY3121 before the 

TRU can be modified to P/N F11QY3714 

according to Thales Service Bulletin 

F11QY3121–24–003.

Note 2: The Accomplishment Instructions 

of Thales Service Bulletin F11QY3121–24–

003 specify to ‘‘complete implementation of 

the [Service Information Letter] SIL 

F11QY3121–24–004.’’ This AD does not 

require doing the Service Information Letter.

59156 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Actions Accomplished Previously 

(g) Replacements done before the effective 

date of this AD according to Airbus Service 

Bulletin A300–27–0099 (for Model A300 B2 

and B4 series airplanes), A300–24–6082 (for 

Model A300–600 series airplanes), or A310–

24–2088 (for Model A310 series airplanes); 

dated October 11, 2002; as applicable; are 

acceptable for compliance with the 

corresponding action required by paragraph 

(a) of this AD. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(h) The Manager, International Branch, 

ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs 

for this AD, if requested in accordance with 

the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(i) French airworthiness directive 2003–

082R1, dated March 31, 2004, also addresses 

the subject of this AD.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 27, 2004. 

Kalene C. Yanamura, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 04–22267 Filed 10–1–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 261 

[SW FRL–7823–9] 

Hazardous Waste Management 

System; Identification and Listing of 

Hazardous Waste; Proposed Exclusion

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule and request for 

comment. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to grant a 

petition submitted by Bayer Polymers 

(Bayer) to exclude (or delist) a certain 

solid waste generated by its Baytown, 

Texas, facility from the lists of 

hazardous wastes. 

EPA used the Delisting Risk 

Assessment Software (DRAS) in the 

evaluation of the impact of the 

petitioned waste on human health and 

the environment. 

EPA bases its proposed decision to 

grant the petition on an evaluation of 

waste-specific information provided by 

the petitioner. This proposed decision, 

if finalized, would exclude the 

petitioned waste from the requirements 

of hazardous waste regulations under 

the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA). 

If finalized, EPA would conclude that 

Bayer’s petitioned waste is 

nonhazardous with respect to the 

original listing criteria and that the 

generation of K027, K104, K111, and 

K112 treated effluent from the facility’s 

waste water treatment plant will not be 

hazardous at the point of generation 

because of the adequately reduces the 

likelihood of migration of constituents 

from this waste. EPA would also 

conclude that Bayer’s process 

minimizes short-term and long-term 

threats from the petitioned waste to 

human health and the environment.

DATES: EPA will accept comments until 

November 3, 2004. EPA will stamp 

comments received after the close of the 

comment period as late. These late 

comments may not be considered in 

formulating a final decision. Your 

requests for a hearing must reach EPA 

by October 19, 2004. The request must 

contain the information prescribed in 40 

CFR 260.20(d).

ADDRESSES: Please send three copies of 

your comments. You should send two 

copies to the Chief, Corrective Action 

and Waste Minimization Section (6PD–

C), Multimedia Planning and Permitting 

Division, U. S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Region 6, 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202. You 

should send a third copy to the Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality, 

P.O. Box 13087, Austin, TX 78712. 

Identify your comments at the top with 

this regulatory docket number: [R6–

TXDEL–FY04–Bayer]. You may submit 

your comments electronically to 

Michelle Peace at 

peace.michelle@epa.gov. 

You should address requests for a 

hearing to Ben Banipal, Chief, 

Corrective Action and Waste 

Minimization Section (6PD–C), 

Multimedia Planning and Permitting 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Dallas, Texas 75202.

FOR FURTHER TECHNICAL INFORMATION

CONTACT: Michelle Peace (214) 665–

7430.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The information in this section is 

organized as follows:

I. Overview Information 

A. What action is EPA proposing? 

A. Why is EPA proposing to approve this 

delisting? 

C. How will Bayer manage the waste, if it 

is delisted? 

D. When would the proposed delisting 

exclusion be finalized? 

E. How would this action affect states? 

II. Background 

A. What is the history of the delisting 

program? 

B. What is a delisting petition, and what 

does it require of a petitioner? 

C. What factors must EPA consider in 

deciding whether to grant a delisting 

petition?

III. EPA’s Evaluation of the Waste 

Information and Data 

A. What wastes did Bayer petition EPA to 

delist? 

B. Who is Bayer and what process do they 

use to generate the petition waste? 

C. What information did Bayer submit to 

support this petition? 

D. What were the results of Bayer’s 

analysis? 

E. How did EPA evaluate the risk of 

delisting this waste? 

F. What did EPA conclude about Bayer’s 

analysis? 

G. What other factors did EPA consider in 

its evaluation? 

H. What is EPA’s evaluation of this 

delisting petition? 

IV. Next Steps 

A. With what conditions must the 

petitioner comply? 

B. What happens, if Bayer violates the 

terms and conditions? 

V. Public Comments 

A. How may I as an interested party submit 

comments? 

B. How may I review the docket or obtain 

copies of the proposed exclusion? 

VI. Regulatory Impact 

VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act 

IX. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

X. Executive Order 13045 

XI. Executive Order 13084 

XII. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancements Act 

XIII. Executive Order 13132 Federalism

I. Overview Information 

A. What Action Is EPA Proposing? 

EPA is proposing to grant the 

delisting petition submitted by Bayer to 

have its Outfall 007 Treated Effluent 

(K027, K104, K111, and K112 listed 

hazardous waste) excluded, or delisted, 

from the definition of a hazardous 

waste. 

B. Why Is EPA Proposing To Approve 

This Delisting? 

Bayer’s petition requests a delisting 

for the treated effluent derived from the 

treatment of hazardous waste water 

listed as K027, K104, K111, and K112 

and non-hazardous waste water 

identified as brine header waste water. 

Bayer does not believe that the 

petitioned waste meets the criteria for 

which EPA listed it. Bayer also believes 

no additional constituents or factors 

could cause the waste to be hazardous. 

EPA’s review of this petition included 

consideration of the original listing 

criteria, and the additional factors 

required by the Hazardous and Solid 

Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). 

See Section 3001(f) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 

6921(f), and 40 CFR 260.22 (d)(1)–(4). In 

making the initial delisting