[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 106 (Friday, May 31, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27323-27325]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-13530]



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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs Administration

49 CFR Part 195

[Docket PS-140(e); Notice 6]
RIN 2137-AC34


Areas Unusually Sensitive to Environmental Damage

AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), DOT.

ACTION: Public workshop.

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

SUMMARY: RSPA invites industry, government agencies, and the public to 
the fifth workshop on unusually sensitive areas (USAs). The purpose of 
this workshop is to openly discuss drinking water resources. This 
workshop is a continuation of the USA workshops held June 15-16, 1995; 
October 17, 1995; January 18, 1996; and April 10-11, 1996.

DATES: The workshop will be held on June 18-19, 1996, from 8:30 a.m. to 
4:00 p.m. Persons who are unable to attend may submit written comments 
in duplicate by July 30, 1996. However, persons submitting comments to 
be considered at the June 18-19 workshop must do so by June 10, 1966. 
Interested persons should submit as part of their written comments all 
material that is relevant to a statement of fact or argument. Late 
filed comments will be considered so far as practicable.

ADDRESSES: The workshop will be held at the U.S. DOT, Nassif Building, 
400 Seventh Street SW., Room 6244-48, Washington, DC. Non-federal 
employee visitors are admitted into the DOT building through the 
southwest entrance at Seventh and E Streets SW. Persons who want to 
participate in the workshop should call (202) 366-2392 or e-mail their 
name, affiliation, and phone number to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f784969a928494b785848796d9939883d9909881"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b5c6d4d8d0c6d6f5c7c6c5d49bd1dac19bd2dac3">[email protected]</span></a> before close 
of business June 10, 1996.
    Send written comments in duplicate to the Dockets Unit, Room 8421, 
RSPA, U.S. DOT, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. 
Identify the docket and notice numbers stated in the heading of this 
notice.
    All comments and docketed materials will be available for 
inspection and copying in Room 8421 between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. 
each business day. A summary of the workshop will be available from the 
Dockets Unit about three weeks after the workshop.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christina Sames, (202) 366-4561, about this document, or the Dockets 
Unit, (202) 366-5046, for copies of this document or other material in 
the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The pipeline safety laws (49 U.S.C. 
Sec. 60109) require the Secretary of Transportation to prescribe 
regulations that establish criteria for identifying each hazardous 
liquid pipeline facility and gathering line, whether otherwise subject 
to 49 U.S.C. Chapter 601, located in an area that the Secretary, in 
consultation with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), describes 
as unusually sensitive to environmental damage if there is a hazardous 
liquid pipeline accident.
    Consistent with the President's regulatory policy (E.O. 12866), 
RSPA wants to accomplish this congressional mandate at the least cost 
to society. Toward this end, RSPA is seeking early public participation 
in the rulemaking process by holding public workshops at which 
participants, including RSPA staff, may exchange views on relevant 
issues. RSPA hopes these workshops will enable government and industry 
to reach a better understanding of the problem and the potential 
solutions before proposed rules are issued.
    To date, RSPA has held four public workshops on unusually sensitive 
areas (USAs). Participants at the workshops have included 
representatives from the hazardous liquid pipeline industry; the 
Departments of Interior, Agriculture, Transportation, and Commerce; 
EPA;

[[Page 27324]]

non-government agencies; and the public.
    The first workshop was held on June 15 and 16, 1995, and focused on 
criteria being considered to determine USAs (60 FR 27948; May 26, 
1995). A second workshop held on October 17, 1995, focused on 
developing a process that could be used to determine if an area is a 
USA (60 FR 44824; August 29, 1995). The third workshop on January 18, 
1996, focused on guiding principles for determining USAs (61 FR 342; 
January 4, 1996).
    Participants at the fourth workshop held April 10-11, 1996, (61 FR 
13144; March 26, 1996) discussed the criteria, components, and 
parameters of the following ten terms that have been used when 
describing USAs: Significant, Threat of significant contamination, 
Contamination, Ecological, Drinking water resources, Recreational 
areas, Economic areas, Cultural areas, Readily available, and Uniform. 
Participants also discussed the scope and objectives of the additional 
USA workshops.
    Additional information and the results of the four workshops can be 
obtained from the RSPA Docket Unit at (202) 366-5046. Please reference 
Docket PS-140, PS-140(a), PS-140(b), and PS-140(c), when requesting the 
information.

API Technical Meeting

    On May 9-10, 1996, the American Petroleum Institute (API) held a 
meeting of technical experts to discuss drinking water resources. RSPA 
and EPA attended this meeting and provided a draft discussion point 
paper on drinking water resources that RSPA intends to discuss at its 
public workshop on drinking water resources. The draft discussed 
possible areas of primary concern (also known as USA candidates) and 
possible filtering criteria that could be used in determining which 
drinking water resources are unusually sensitive to damage from a 
hazardous liquid pipeline release. The unedited notes from the API 
meeting and all materials presented at that meeting can be obtained 
from the Dockets Unit at the above address. Please reference Docket PS-
140(d) when requesting the information.
    The following discusses the areas of primary concern and filtering 
criteria for drinking water resources that are currently being 
considered. This draft will be discussed in detail at the June 18 and 
19 workshop. This draft is not final and RSPA invites comments on these 
primary concerns, filtering criteria, and issues. This draft and any 
additional information that is submitted to the docket before June 10 
will be considered at the June 18-19 workshop.

Drinking Water Resource Areas of Primary Concern

    Drinking water resource areas of primary concern (USA candidates) 
are a subset of the drinking water surface intakes and groundwater 
based drinking water supplies. Drinking water USA candidates being 
considered include:
    A. Public Water System (PWS): provides piped water for human 
consumption to at least 15 service connections or serves an average of 
at least 25 people for at least 60 days each year. These systems 
include the sources of the water supplies--i.e., surface or ground, 
PWSs can be community, nontransient noncommunity, or transient 
noncommunity systems.
    1. Community Water System (CWS): a PWS that provides water to the 
same population year round.
    2. Nontransient Noncommunity Water System (NTNCWS): a PWS that 
regularly serves at least 25 of the same people at least six months of 
the year. [Examples of these systems include schools, factories, and 
hospitals that have their own water supplies.]
    3. Transient Noncommunity Water System (TNCWS): a PWS that caters 
to transitory customers in nonresidential areas (e.g., campgrounds 
motels, and gas stations).
    B. Wellhead Protection Area (WHPA): the surface and subsurface area 
surrounding a well or well field that supplies a public water system 
through which contaminants are likely to pass and eventually reach the 
water well or well field.
    C. Sole Source Aquifer (SSA): areas designated by the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency under the Sole Source Aquifer program 
as the ``sole or principal'' source of drinking water for an area.

Drinking Water Resource Filtering Criteria

    Filtering criteria are intended to assist RSPA in determining which 
areas of primary concern are truly unusually sensitive to damage from a 
hazardous liquid pipeline release. Drinking water resource filtering 
criteria would be applied to the drinking water resource areas of 
primary concern to determine which of the USA candidates are USAs. RSPA 
is considering the following filtering criteria and has listed issues 
under each:
    Filter Criteria #11: If the public water system is a Transient 
Noncommunity Water System (TNCWS), the water intakes shall not be 
designated as USAs.
    Filter Criteria #1 Issue: The readily available data source that 
would be used to make this determination on a nationwide basis is the 
Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS), that is being replaced by the 
Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS). There are concerns 
about the quality of this database and whether it can be used to 
confidently identify TNCWSs.
    Filter Criteria #2: For CWS and NTNCWS that obtain their water 
supply primarily from surface water sources, and do not have an 
adequate alternative source of water, the water intakes shall be 
designated as USAs.
    Filter Criteria #2 Issues:
    A. A definition is needed for an adequate alternative source of 
water. The intent is that, in the event of a spill which threatens to 
shut down a water intake, there would be surface water intakes in a 
different surface water body that are not in the threat zone, or there 
would be groundwater sources that could be utilized during the threat 
period, or there would be other drinking water systems that could 
temporarily provide drinking water to the shut-down system.
    B. There are no readily available national databases on which this 
filtering criteria could be applied.
    Filter Criteria #3: For CWS and NTNCWS that obtain their water 
supply primarily from groundwater sources, where the source aquifer is 
identified as a Class I or Class IIa (as identified in Pettyjohn et 
al., 1991; EPA Document: EPA/600/2-91/043, August 1991; see Attachment 
A), and that do not have an adequate alternative source of water, the 
WHPAs for such systems shall be designated as USAs.
    Filter Criteria #3 Issues:
    A. Determination of the source aquifer is a complex problem, and no 
national database is available. Furthermore, for some CWS and NTNCWS, 
the depth of the wells or source aquifer is not known.
    B. Seven states do not have Wellhead Protection Programs. Where 
WHPAs are not adequately delineated, WHPA (criteria, threshold, 
methods, etc.) will be generated.
    C. A definition is needed for an adequate alternative source of 
water for groundwater systems.
    D. The classification system discussed in Filter Criteria #3 
(above) has data coverage for the conterminous United States. Data for 
Alaska, Hawaii, and all other U.S. possessions must be identified.
    Filter Criteria #4: For CWS and NTNCWS that obtain their water 
supply primarily from groundwater sources, where the source aquifer is 
identified as

[[Page 27325]]

a Class IIb, Class IIc or Class U (as identified in Pettyjohn et al., 
1991; EPA Document: EPA/600/2-91/043, August 1991; see Attachment A), 
the public water systems that rely on these aquifers shall not be 
designated as USAs.
    Filter Criteria #5: For CWS and NTNCWS that obtain their water 
supply primarily from ground water sources, where the source aquifer is 
identified as a Class I or Class IIa (as identified in Pettyjohn et 
al., 1991; EPA Document: EPA/600/2-91/043, August 1991; see Attachment 
A), and the aquifer is designated as a sole source aquifer, an area 
twice the WHPA shall be designated as an USA.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 23, 1966.
Richard B. Felder,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.

Attachment A

    Recommended Data Source: EPA Report 600/2-91/043. Regional 
Assessment of Aquifer Vulnerability and Sensitivity in the 
Conterminous United States. Office of Research and Development, 
Washington, DC. 319pp.
    The following information was obtained from pages 6-8 of the 
above report:
    CLASS I AQUIFERS (Surficial or shallow, permeable units; highly 
vulnerable to contamination).
    Unconsolidated Aquifers (Class Ia): Class la aquifers consist of 
surficial, unconsolidated, and permeable alluvial, terrace, outwash, 
beach, dune and other similar deposits. These units generally 
contain layers of sand and gravel that, commonly, are interbedded to 
some degree with silt and clay. Not all deposits mapped as Class la 
are important water-bearing units, but they are likely to be both 
permeable and vulnerable. The only natural protection of aquifers of 
this class is the thickness of the unsaturated zone and the presence 
of fine-grained material.
    Soluble and Fractured Bedrock Aquifers (Class Ib): Lithologies 
in this class include limestone, dolomite, and locally, evaporitic 
units that contain documented karst features or solution channels, 
regardless of size. Generally these systems have a wide range in 
permeability * * * Also included in this class are sedimentary 
strata, and metamorphic and igneous (intrusive and extrusive) rocks 
that are significantly faulted, fractured, or jointed. In all cases 
groundwater movement is largely controlled by secondary openings. 
Well yields range widely, but the important feature is the potential 
for rapid vertical and lateral ground water movement along preferred 
pathways, which result in a high degree of vulnerability.
    Semiconsolidated Aquifers (Class Ic): Semiconsolidated systems 
generally contain poorly to moderately indurated sand and gravel 
that is interbedded with clay and silt. This group is intermediate 
to the unconsolidated and consolidated end members. These systems 
are common in the Tertiary age rocks that are exposed throughout the 
Gulf and Atlantic coastal states. Semiconsolidated conditions also 
arise from the presence of intercalated clay and caliche within 
primarily unconsolidated to poorly consolidated units, such as 
occurs in parts of the High Plains Aquifer.
    Covered Aquifers (Class Id): This class consists of any Class I 
aquifer that is overlain by less than 50 feet of low permeability, 
unconsolidated material, such as glacial till, lacustrian, and loess 
deposits.
    CLASS II AQUIFERS (Consolidated bedrock aquifers; moderately 
vulnerable).
    Higher Yield Bedrock Aquifers (Class IIa): These aquifers 
generally consist of fairly permeable sandstone or conglomerate that 
contain lesser amounts of interbedded fine grained clastics (shale, 
siltstone, mudstone) and occasionally carbonate units. In general, 
well yields must exceed 50 gpm to be included in this class. Locally 
fracturing may contribute to the dominant primary porosity and 
permeability of these systems.
    Lower Yield Bedrock Aquifers (Class IIb): In most cases, these 
aquifers consist of sedimentary or crystalline rocks. Most commonly, 
lower yield systems consist of the same classic rock types present 
in the higher yield systems, but in the former case grain size is 
generally smaller and the degree of cementation or induration is 
greater, both of which lead to a lower permeability. In many 
existing and ancient mountain regions, such as the Appalachians 
(Blue Ridge and Piedmont), the core consists of crystalline rocks 
that are fractured to some degree. Well yields are commonly less 
than 50 gpm, although they may be larger in valleys than on 
interstream divides.
    Covered Bedrock Aquifers (Class IIc): This group consists of 
Class IIa and IIb aquifers that are overlain by less than 50 feet of 
unconsolidated material of loq permeability, such as glacial till, 
lacustrian, or loess deposits. It is assumed that most Class V wells 
are relatively shallow and, therefore, 50 feet or less of fine 
grained cover could reduce but not necessarily eliminate the 
vulnerability of underlying Class II systems.
    CLASS III (Consolidated or unconsolidated aquifers that are 
overlain by more than 50 feet of low permeability material; low 
vulnerability).
    Aquifers of this type are the least vulnerable of all the 
classes because they are naturally protected by a thick layer of 
fine grained material, such as glacial till or shale. Examples 
include parts of the Northern Great Plains where the Pierre Shale of 
Cretaceous age crops out over thousands of square miles and is 
hundreds of feet thick. In many of the glaciated states, till forms 
an effective cover over bedrock or buried outwash aquifers, and 
elsewhere alternating layers of shale, siltstone, and fine grained 
sandstone insulate and protect the deeper major water bearing zones 
* * *
    CLASS U (Undifferentiated aquifers): This classification is used 
where several lithologic and hydrologic conditions are present 
within a mappable area. Units are assigned to this class because of 
constraints of mapping scale, the presenece of undelineated members 
within a formation or group, or the presence of nonuniformly 
occurring features, such as fracturing. This class is intended to 
convey a wider range of vulnerability than is usually contained 
within any other single class.
    SUBCLASS V (Variable covered aquifers): The modifier ``v'', such 
as Class IIa-v, is used to describe areas where an undetermined or 
highly variable thickness of low permeability sediments overlie the 
major water bearing zone. To provide the largest amount of 
information, the underlying aquifer was mapped as if the cover were 
absent, and the ``v'' designation was added to the classification. 
The ``v'' indicates that a variable thickness of low permeability 
material covers the aquifer and, since the thickness of the cover, 
to a large degree, controls vulnerability, this aspect is undefined.

[FR Doc. 96-13530 Filed 5-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-M

</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>