### 58985 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules

(l) New Attach Pin Replacement

For airplanes having line numbers 1 through 3534 inclusive on which an attach pin of the horizontal stabilizer rear spar having P/N 180A1612–7 or 180A1612–8 has been replaced with an attach pin having P/ N 180A1612–3 or 180A1612–4 before the effective date of this AD: Prior to the accumulation of 56,000 total flight cycles on the pin, or within 1,000 flight cycles on the airplane after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, replace the attach pin having P/N 180A1612–3 or 180A1612–4 with an attach pin having P/N 180A1612–7 or 180A1612–8, as applicable, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737–55–1093, dated April 9, 2012.

(m) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (n)(1) of this AD. Information may be emailed to 9-ANM-Seattle-ACO-AMOCRequests-faa.gov.

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/ certificate holding district office.

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes ODA that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD.

(4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2013–07–07, Amendment 39–17411 (78 FR 22182, April 15, 2013), are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.

(n) Related Information

(1) For more information about this AD, contact Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6440; fax: 425–917–6590; email: Nancy.Marsh@faa.gov.

(2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, Seattle, Washington 98124–2207; telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766– 5680; Internet https:// www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221. Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 17, 2013. Ross Landes, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2013–23274 Filed 9–24–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DELAWARE RIVER BASIN COMMISSION** 

**18 CFR Part 410**

**Proposed Amendments to the Water Quality Regulations, Water Code and**  **Comprehensive Plan To Update Water Quality Criteria for pH** 

**AGENCY :**  Delaware River Basin Commission.

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule; notice of public hearing.

**SUMMARY :**  The Commission will hold a public hearing to receive comments on proposed amendments to the Commission’s Water Quality Regulations, Water Code and Comprehensive Plan to update stream quality objectives (also called ‘‘water quality criteria’’) for pH in interstate tidal and non-tidal reaches of the main stem Delaware River.

**DATES :**  The public hearing will be held at 2 p.m. on Thursday, October 24, 2013. The hearing will continue until all those wishing to testify have had an opportunity to do so. Written comments will be accepted and must be received by 5 p.m. on Thursday, November 21, 2013. For more information regarding the procedures for the hearing and comments, see Supplementary Information.

**ADDRESSES :**  The public hearing will be held in the Goddard Conference Room at the Commission’s office building located at 25 State Police Drive, West Trenton, NJ. As Internet mapping tools are inaccurate for this location, please use the driving directions posted on the Commission’s Web site.

Oral Testimony and Written Comments: Persons wishing to testify at the hearing are asked to register in advance by phoning Paula Schmitt at 609–883–9500, ext. 224. Written comments may be submitted as follows: If by email, to paula.schmitt@ drbc.state.nj.us; if by fax, to Commission Secretary at 609–883–9522; if by U.S. Mail, to Commission Secretary, DRBC, P.O. Box 7360, West Trenton, NJ 08628–0360; and if by overnight mail, to Commission Secretary, DRBC, 25 State Police Drive, West Trenton, NJ 08628–0360. Comments also may be delivered by hand at any time during the Commission’s regular office hours (Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. through 5 p.m. except on national holidays) until the close of the comment period at 5 p.m. on Thursday, November 21, 2013. In all cases, please include the commenter’s name, address and affiliation, if any, in the comment document and ‘‘pH Rulemaking’’ in the subject line.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  The rule text and a report entitled ‘‘pH Criteria Revision Recommendations for Interstate Waters of the Delaware River Basin: Basis & Background Document’’ (DRBC, March 2013) are available on the Commission’s Web site, www.drbc.net. Hard copies of the latter document may be obtained for the price of postage by contacting Ms. Paula Schmitt at 609– 883–9500, ext. 224. For questions about the technical basis for the rule, please contact Dr. Erik Silldorff at 609–883– 9500 ext. 234. For queries about the rulemaking process, please contact Pamela Bush at 609–477–7203.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Background. The Commission in 1967 assigned stream quality objectives (also called ‘‘criteria’’) for pH to all tidal and non-tidal interstate streams in the Delaware River Basin (‘‘basin’’). Since that time, scientists’ understanding of natural fluctuations in freshwater and saltwater pH levels has grown. Likewise, the development and application of pH criteria have evolved, while the Commission’s pH stream quality objectives have remained unchanged. Commission scientists in consultation with experts from DRBC member states and federal agencies have evaluated the pH criteria adopted by signatory states and recommended byfederal agencies over the past four-anda-half decades. They have concluded that in order to minimize regulatory inconsistencies and better address natural pH cycles in the main stem Delaware River, two classes of revisions to the Commission’s criteria for this shared interstate waterway should be considered. The first concerns the range of pH levels deemed to comprise the numeric standard within the tidal and non-tidal zones of the main stem and tidal portions of tributaries. The second concerns excursions outside the standard range that are attributable to natural conditions. The proposed revisions were unanimously endorsed by the Commission’s Water Quality Advisory Committee (‘‘WQAC’’) in March 2009. The WQAC is a standing committee of stakeholders, including regulators, municipal and industrial dischargers, academicians and


### 58986 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules

environmental organizations that advises the Commission on technical matters relating to water quality within the basin.

Proposed Change to Existing Criteria. The Commission’s existing pH criteria applicable to the main stem are expressed as ranges. ‘‘Between 6.0 and 8.5’’ is the range currently assigned to all freshwater (non-tidal) zones of the main stem Delaware River—DRBC Water Quality Zones 1A through 1E. In all tidal zones—DRBC Water Quality Zones 2 through 6, which include the tidal main stem and tidal portions of its tributaries—the pH range currently in effect is ‘‘between 6.5 and 8.5’’. The proposed amendments would make 6.5 the lower threshold of acceptable pH conditions for all water quality zones encompassing reaches of the main stem and tidal portions of its tributaries.

Natural Conditions Clause. The proposed amendments would add a clause to the pH criteria recognizing natural deviations outside the 6.5 to 8.5 pH range in the moderately acidic waters draining the Catskill Mountains and Pocono Plateau, the high-light and high-productivity zones of the non-tidal main stem, and the acidic coastal plain tidewaters of the Delaware Estuary.

Proposed Rule Text. In accordance with these proposed changes, the pH criteria for Water Quality Zones 1A through 1E (non-tidal main stem) and 2 through 6 (tidal main stem and tidal portions of tributaries) are proposed to be amended to read, ‘‘Between 6.5 and 8.5 inclusive, unless outside this range due to natural conditions.’’ The affected sections of the Commission’s Water Quality Regulations consist of subsection C.3 of each of sections 2.20.2 through 2.20.6, respectively, for Water Quality Zones 1A through 1E (non-tidal main stem); and sections 3.30.2 through 3.30.6, respectively, for Water Quality Zones 2 through 6 (tidal main stem and tidal portions of tributaries). It is further proposed to amend paragraph 410.1(c) of title 18 of the Code of Federal Regulations by replacing the date of incorporation by reference that appears there (currently, December 8, 2010), with the date on which the Commission adopts a final rule in response to this proposal.

Dated: September 17, 2013.
Pamela M. Bush, Commission Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2013–23029 Filed 9–24–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6360–01–P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND**  **SECURITY**

**Coast Guard**

**33 CFR Part 151**

**[Docket No. USCG–2004–19621]**

**RIN 1625–AA89**

**Dry Cargo Residue Discharges in the Great Lakes** 

**AGENCY :**  Coast Guard, DHS.

**ACTION :**  Notice of availability and request for comments.

**SUMMARY :**  The Coast Guard announces the availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) assessing the potential environmental impacts associated with a proposed final rule to regulate discharges of dry cargo residue (DCR) in the Great Lakes. The Coast Guard requests public comment on the FEIS.

**DATES :**  Comments and related material must reach the Docket Management Facility on or before October 25, 2013.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit or view comments or related material identified by docket number USCG–2004–19621 using any one of the following methods:

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov

.

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590–

0001.

(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202–366–9329.

To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  If you have questions on this notice, call or email Timothy P. O’Brien, Coast Guard; telephone 202–372–1539, email Timothy.P.O’Brien@uscg.mil. If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Barbara Hairston, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202–366–9826.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, codified at 42 U.S.C. 4321– 4370f, Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023–01, and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, we are making available to the public our FEIS assessing the potential environmental impacts associated with a proposed final rule to regulate discharges of dry cargo residue in the Great Lakes.

In August 2008, the Coast Guard issued an Environmental Impact Statement (the Phase I FEIS), which evaluated regulatory alternatives for discharging DCR into the Great Lakes. Based in part on that FEIS’s findings, we published an interim rule on September 29, 2008 (73 FR 56492). It kept in place the Coast Guard’s interim enforcement policy for Great Lakes DCR discharges and announced our intention to research Phase I FEIS data gaps related to DCR discharge control measure costs and effectiveness.

The Phase II FEIS we are now making available is ‘‘tiered’’ off the Phase I FEIS, addresses the Phase I FEIS data gaps, and would provide support for a Coast Guard final rule to take the place of the 2008 interim rule. It finalizes the Phase II draft EIS that we made available for public comment when we issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (77 FR 44528; Jul. 30, 2012) to propose the final rule. The Phase II FEIS reviews data we collected from approximately 2,000 DCRreporting forms and 30 Coast Guardobserved dry cargo loading and unloading operations. Data collected permitted further evaluations of DCR quantities and the effectiveness of control measures. The Phase II FEIS analysis concludes that the final rulewould require maintaining a ‘‘broomclean’’ standard on the vessel deck and implementing a management plan to minimize DCR discharges from a vessel’s deck and tunnel. Vessels wouldneed to keep onboard records of DCRrelated discharges and continue observing existing DCR discharge exclusion areas. Mitigation of nearshore and port impacts would be included through a prohibition of limestone and clean stone DCR discharges within 3 statute miles of shore. In the Western Basin of Lake Erie, vessels not traveling beyond 3 statute miles from shore could discharge DCR within dredged navigation channels and not create adverse impacts to native sediment or benthos.

We encourage you to submit comments or related material on the FEIS. Please include your personal contact information so we can contact you if we need to follow up. All comments received will be posted without change to http:// www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. Anyone can search http:// www.regulations.gov using a comment submitter’s personal information; for more information see the Department of Transportation’s Privacy Act notice (73