[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 249 (Tuesday, December 30, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 78365-78369]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30451]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0807]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Mantua Creek, Paulsboro, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the operating regulation
that governs the Conrail railroad bridge over

Mantua Creek at mile marker 1.4 in Paulsboro, NJ. The bridge owner,
Conrail, is modifying the operating system which controls the bridge
operations. Cameras will be installed and the bridge will be remotely
operated from Mt. Laurel, NJ. Train crew will no longer be required to
stop and check the waterway for approaching vessel traffic prior to
initiating a bridge closure or be responsible to operate the bridge
closure equipment located at the bridge site.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before February 13, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2014-0807 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: 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. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these
methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mrs. Kashanda Booker, Fifth Coast Guard District Bridge
Administration Division, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
Conrail Consolidated Rail Corporation
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Sec.  Section Symbol
U.S.C. United States Code

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this proposed rulemaking by
submitting comments and related materials. All comments received will
be posted, without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will
include any personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
proposed rulemaking (USCG-2014-0807), indicate the specific section of
this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for
each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and
material online (http://www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or hand
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a
comment online via http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered
received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment.
If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered
as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the
Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and
a mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding
your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number USCG-2014-0807 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery,
submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches,
suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail
and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all
comments and material received during the comment period and may change
the rule based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2014-0807) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES.
Please explain why one would be beneficial. If we determine that one
would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place
announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The bridge owner, Conrail, requested a change to 33 CFR Sec.
117.729 (a) due to the replacement of the existing bridge structure.
Conrail also requested to modify the operating regulations due to their
intent to install sensor equipment as part of the reconstruction
efforts for their bridge across Mantua Creek.
    The original structure for the bridge at mile marker 1.4 across
Mantua Creek was an A-Frame swing bridge with unlimited vertical
clearance in the open position. This swing bridge is being replaced by
a vertical lift bridge with a 25-foot vertical clearance in the open
position. The horizontal clearance for the swing bridge was 32 feet.
The vertical lift bridge will have a horizontal clearance of 44 feet.
Conrail proposed to install equipment to support remote operation of
the bridge.
    The proposed regulations will change three aspects of the bridge
operation. Specifically, the proposed regulations would enable (1)
remote operation of the bridge, (2) installation of cameras and
infrared sensors to verify whether any vessels are transiting the
waterway before a bridge closure is initiated, and (3) alter the
requirement for signals to be used during drawbridge movement
operations. This proposed rule will not change the operating schedule
of the bridge.
    The scope of the waterway inspection is different between the
current on-site train crewmember inspection process and the range of
the proposed camera installation. There is also a difference in the
time it takes between the inspection and the initiation of the bridge
closure operations. Currently the regulation requires an on-site train
crewmember to conduct an inspection of the waterway

for vessels by stopping the train approximately 150 feet north of the
bridge site when approached from the north or 150 feet south of the
bridge site when approached from the south. Once the train is stopped,
the train crewmember walks to the bridge site and physically looks up
and down the channel. The time it takes to stop the train, walk to the
bridge, conduct the inspection, walk back to the train, and re-start
the train takes 5-10 minutes. The proposed regulation allows the remote
operating station to inspect the waterway with cameras without first
stopping the train which permits a more efficient operating system.
    The closer the vessels are to the bridge, the more likely it is
that the train crewmember will see them using the process required by
the current regulation. Under the proposed regulations, the camera
inspection of the waterway has the capability to zoom up and down
stream allowing for easier detection of a smaller vessel approaching
the bridge. After inspection of the waterway, using the cameras, the
bridge closing operations would then occur from a remote location at
the Mt. Laurel remote operating station.
    Currently, the bridge is required to be in the open to navigation
position between March through November and is designed to be operated
by the train crew. Under the proposed regulations Conrail proposes to
operate the Mantua Creek Bridge at mile 1.4 from a remote location, the
Conrail Mt. Laurel, NJ remote operating station, at all times. A draw
tender may be stationed at the bridge at various times when it is
deemed necessary for safety purposes such as during times when bridge
maintenance is being performed.
    Conrail operates other bridges at the Mt. Laurel, NJ remote
operating station. The change from on-site control of the bridge to the
Mt. Laurel, NJ operating station enables Conrail to consolidate its
control of the train line and Mantua Creek bridge. By controlling the
track as well as the bridge operating mechanism at the Mt. Laurel
station, the remote operator has access to more information regarding
the anticipated arrival time for when the trains will be at the bridge
site. Information such as train speed and location directly contribute
to when the bridge will need to be closed. The proposed change to a
remote operating station may shorten the duration of the bridge
closures due to the higher accuracy of information on train speed and
anticipated arrival time at the bridge site.
    The depth of Mantua Creek at the bridge is 22 feet. The diurnal
tidal range is 6 feet. Mantua Creek is used by several recreational
vessels during the summer boating season. There is no commercial vessel
traffic on Mantua Creek.
    From March through November, the bridge is in the open to
navigation position and will only be lowered for the passage of train
and maintenance. Train activity in this location requires the bridge to
close to navigation up to eight times a day Monday thru Friday. On
Saturday and Sunday, the bridge is closed up to six times each day.
    From December through the end of February, the bridge is in the
closed to navigation position but will open if 4 hours notice is given.
    Conrail also proposes to specify the dates when the bridge will be
left in the open to navigation position, March 1 through November 30
and left in the closed to navigation position from December 1 through
the last day of February. This represents a clarification of the
existing regulatory language, and not a substantive change to the
existing bridge schedule.

C. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    Under the proposed regulation, the responsibility to operate the
drawbridge is being removed from the train crew and being transferred
to the remote operating station located in Mt. Laurel, NJ. The visual
examination of the waterway to confirm whether or not any vessels are
present will shift from the train crew to the Mt. Laurel remote
operating station. The train crew will not be required to stop and
check the waterway prior to the remote operating station closing or
opening the bridge. A new requirement for the remote operating station
is being proposed that uses cameras and sensors to confirm whether any
vessels are navigating Mantua Creek near the CONRAIL bridge prior to
closing the bridge.
    From the controls at the Mt. Laurel remote operating station, the
timeframe to initiate the bridge closure is not more than 15 minutes
before a train will arrive at the bridge location. At the Mt. Laurel
remote operating station, the cameras and sensors will be used
continuously during the bridge closure operations to monitor the
waterway for the presence of vessels.
    With the limit of 25 feet of vertical clearance in the open
position, the movement of the bridge impacts vessels transiting the
waterway. Signals alerting any vessels on Mantua Creek about this
movement are being modified to reflect the operating process of a new
vertical lift bridge instead of the removed swing bridge. The bridge
will use flashing red lights along with sounding the horn to notify
waterway users that the bridge is changing position. The current
regulation requires a flashing red light, one prolonged blast, one
short blast, and an audio voice announcement to indicate the bridge is
opening. The proposed regulation states that the light will change from
fixed green to flashing red any time the bridge is not in the full open
position. Prior to bridge movement, there will be two prolonged blasts
followed by two short blasts. The proposed regulation removes the audio
voice announcement.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Order 12866 or under
section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and Budget
has not reviewed it under those Orders. The changes proposed by this
NPRM impact the methods used to operate the drawbridge. There are no
changes proposed to the drawbridge operating schedule.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    This action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. There
are no changes proposed to the drawbridge operating schedule. Vessels
that can safely transit under the bridge may do so at any time. The
vertical clearance of 25 feet is consistent with other approved bridges
on Mantua Creek.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this
proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not cause a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(32)(e), of the Instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not required for this rule. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Revise Sec.  117.729 (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  117.729  Mantua Creek.

    (a) The draw of the Conrail automated railroad bridge, mile 1.4, at
Paulsboro, NJ shall operate as follows:
    (1) The bridge will be operated remotely by the South Jersey Train
Dispatcher located in Mt. Laurel, NJ. Operational information will be
provided 24 hours a day by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (2) From March 1 through November 30, the draw shall be left in the
open position and will only be lowered for the passage of trains and to
perform periodic maintenance authorized in accordance with subpart A of
this part.
    (3) From December 1 through the last day of February, the draw will
open on signal if at least 4 hours notice is given by telephone at
(856) 231-2282.
    (4) The timeframe to initiate the bridge closure will be not more
than 15 minutes before a train will arrive at the bridge location. If a
train, moving toward the bridge has crossed the home signal for the
bridge, the train may continue across the bridge and must clear the
bridge prior to stopping for any reason. Trains shall be controlled so
that any delay in opening of the draw shall not exceed ten minutes
except as provided in Sec.  117.31(b).
    (5) The bridge will be equipped with cameras and channel sensors to
visually

and electronically ensure the waterway is clear before the bridge
closes. The video and sensors are located and monitored at the remote
operating location in Mt. Laurel, NJ. The channel sensors signal will
be a direct input to the bridge control system. In the event of failure
or obstruction of the infrared channel sensors, the bridge will
automatically stop closing and the South Jersey Train Dispatcher will
return the bridge to the open position. In the event of video failure
the bridge will remain in the full open position.
    (6) The Conrail Railroad center span light will change from fixed
green to flashing red anytime the bridge is not in the full open
position.
    (7) Prior to downward movement of the span, the horn will sound two
prolonged blasts, followed by a pause, and then two short blasts until
the bridge is seated and locked down. At the time of movement, the
center span light will change from fixed green to flashing red and
remain flashing until the bridge has returned to its full open
position.
    (8) When the train controller at Mt. Laurel has verified that rail
traffic has cleared, they will sound the horn five times to signal the
draw is about to return to its full open position.
    (9) During upward movement of the span, the horn will sound two
prolonged blasts, followed by a pause, and then sound two short blasts
until the bridge is in the full open position. The center span light
will continue to flash red until the bridge is in the fully open
position.
    (10) When the draw cannot be operated from the remote site, a
bridge tender must be called to operate the bridge in the traditional
manner. Personnel shall be dispatched to arrive at the bridge as soon
as possible, but not more than one hour after malfunction or disability
of the remote system.
* * * * *

    Dated: December 11, 2014.
Stephen P. Metruck,
Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2014-30451 Filed 12-29-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 210 (Wednesday, November 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60654-60658]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23893]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2013-0012]

Modification to the List of Appropriate NRTL Program Test
Standards and the Scope of Recognition of Several NRTLs

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, OSHA announces the final decision to: (1) Add
seven new test standards to the Nationally Recognized Testing
Laboratories (NRTL) Program's list of appropriate test standards; (2)
delete or replace several test standards from the NRTL Program's list
of appropriate test standards; and (3) update the scope of recognition
of several NRTLs.

DATES: The actions contained in this notice will become effective on
November 3, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information regarding this notice is
available from the following sources:
    Press inquiries: Contact Mr. Frank Meilinger, Director, OSHA Office
of Communications; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].
    General and technical information: Contact Mr. Kevin Robinson,
Director, Office of Technical Programs and Coordination Activities,
Directorate of Technical Support and Emergency Management, Occupational
Safety and Health Administration; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or email:
[email protected]. OSHA's web page includes information about the
NRTL Program (see http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The NRTL Program recognizes organizations that provide product-
safety testing and certification services to manufacturers. These
organizations perform testing and certification for purposes of the
program, to U.S. consensus-based product-safety test standards. The
products covered by the NRTL Program consist of those items for which
OSHA safety standards require ``certification'' by a NRTL. The
requirements affect electrical products and 38 other types of products.
OSHA does not develop or issue these test standards, but generally
relies on standards development organizations (SDOs), which develop and
maintain the standards using a method that provides input and
consideration of views of industry groups, experts, users, consumers,
governmental authorities and others having broad experience in the
safety field involved.

A. Addition of New Test Standards to the NRTL List of Appropriate Test
Standards

    Periodically, OSHA will add new test standards to the NRTL list of
appropriate test standards following an evaluation of the test standard
document. To qualify as an appropriate test standard, the agency
evaluates the document to (1) verify it represents a product category
for which OSHA requires certification by a NRTL, (2) verify the
document represents an end product and not a component, and (3) verify
the document defines safety test specifications (not installation or
operational performance specifications). OSHA becomes aware of new test
standards through various avenues. For example, OSHA may become aware
of new test standards by: (1) Monitoring notifications issued by
certain SDOs; (2) reviewing applications by NRTLs or applicants seeking
recognition to include a new test standard in their scope of
recognition; and (3) obtaining notification from manufacturers,
manufacturing organizations, government agencies, or other parties that
a new test standard may be

appropriate to add to the list of appropriate standards. OSHA may
determine to include a new test standard in the list, for example, if
the test standard is for a particular type of product that another test
standard also covers, addresses a type of product that no standard
previously covered, or is otherwise new to the NRTL Program.

B. SDO Deletion and Replacement of Test Standards

    The NRTL Program regulations require that appropriate test
standards be maintained and current (29 CFR 1910.7(c)). A test standard
withdrawn by a standards development organization is no longer
considered an appropriate test standard (CPL 01-00-004, NRTL Program
Policies, Procedures and Guidelines Directive, Chapter 2, IX). It is
OSHA's policy to remove recognition of withdrawn test standards by
issuing a correction notice in the Federal Register for all NRTLs
recognized for the withdrawn test standards. However, SDOs frequently
will designate a replacement standard for withdrawn standards. OSHA
will recognize a NRTL for an appropriate replacement test standard if
the NRTL has the requisite testing and evaluation capability for the
replacement test standard.
    One method that NRTLs may use to show such capability involves an
analysis to determine whether any testing and evaluation requirements
of existing test standards in a NRTL's scope are comparable (i.e., are
completely or substantially identical) to the requirements in the
replacement test standard. If OSHA's analysis shows the replacement
test standard does not require additional or different technical
capability than an existing test standard(s), and the replacement test
standard is comparable to the existing test standard(s), then OSHA can
add the replacement test standard to affected NRTLs' scope of
recognition. If OSHA's analysis shows the replacement test standard
requires an additional or different technical capability, or the
replacement test standard is not comparable to any existing test
standards, each affected NRTL seeking to have OSHA add the replacement
test standard to the NRTL's scope of recognition must provide
information to OSHA that demonstrates technical capability.

C. Other Reasons for Removal of Test Standards From the NRTL List of
Appropriate Test Standards

    OSHA may choose to remove a test standard from the NRTL Program's
List of Appropriate Test Standards based on an internal review in which
NRTL Program staff review the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test
Standards to determine if the test standards conform to the definition
of an appropriate test standard defined in NRTL Program regulations and
policy. There are several reasons for removing a test standard based on
this review. First, a document that provides the methodology for a
single test is a test method rather than an appropriate test standard
(29 CFR 1910.7(c)). As stated above, a test standard must specify the
safety requirements for a specific type of product(s). A test method,
however, is a specified technical procedure for performing a test. As
such, a test method is not an appropriate test standard. While a NRTL
may use a test method to determine if certain safety requirements are
met, a test method is not itself a safety requirement for a specific
product category.
    Second, a document that focuses primarily on usage, installation,
or maintenance requirements would also not be considered an appropriate
test standard (NRTL Program Policies, Procedures and Guidelines
Directive, CPL-01-00-004, Chapter 2, Section VIII, B). In some cases,
however, a document may also provide safety test specifications in
addition to usage, installation, and maintenance requirements. In such
cases, the document would be retained as an appropriate test standard
based on the safety test specifications.
    Finally, a document may not be considered an appropriate test
standard if the document covers products for which OSHA does not
require testing and certification (NRTL Program Policies, Procedures
and Guidelines Directive, CPL-01-00-004, Chapter 2, Section VIII, B).
Similarly, a document that covers electrical product components would
not be considered an appropriate test standard. These documents apply
to types of components that have limitation(s) or condition(s) on their
use, which are not appropriate for use as end-use products. These
documents also specify that these types of components are for use only
as part of an end-use product. NRTLs, however, evaluate such components
only in the context of evaluating whether end-use products requiring
NRTL approval are safe for use in the workplace. Testing such
components alone would not indicate that the end-use products
containing the components are safe for use. Accordingly, as a matter of
policy, OSHA considers that documents covering such components are not
appropriate test standards under the NRTL Program. OSHA notes, however,
that it is not deleting from NRTLs' scope of recognition any test
standards covering end-use products that contain such components.
    In addition, OSHA notes that, to conform to a test standard
covering an end-use product, a NRTL must still determine that the
components in the product comply with the components' specific test
standards. In making this determination, NRTLs may test the components
themselves, or accept the testing of a qualified testing organization
that a given component conforms to the particular test standard. OSHA
reviews each NRTL's procedures to determine which approach the NRTL
will use to address components, and reviews the end-use product testing
to verify the NRTL appropriately addresses that product's components.

D. Modification to the List of Appropriate NRTL Program Test Standards
and the Scope of Recognition of Several NRTLs

    OSHA published a Federal Register notice announcing the proposal to
modify the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards and the
Scope of Recognition for Several NRTLs on August 16, 2021 (86 FR
45755). OSHA requested comments by August 31, 2021. However, OSHA
received no comments in response to this notice. OSHA is now proceeding
with this final notice to update the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate
Test Standards and the Scope of Recognition for Several NRTLs.
    In this notice, OSHA announces the final decision to remove certain
test standards (i.e., those listed in Table 2, below) from the scope of
recognition of several NRTLs and to add to the scope of recognition of
some of these NRTLs a replacement test standard, as applicable (Table
1). The tables in this section (Table 3 through Table 7) list, for each
affected NRTL, the test standard(s) that OSHA is removing from the
scope of recognition of the NRTL, along with the replacement test
standard (as applicable).

II. Final Decision To Add New Test Standards to the NRTL Program's List
of Appropriate Test Standards

    In this notice, OSHA announces the final decision to add seven test
standards to the NRTL Program's list of appropriate test standards. The
standards OSHA is adding to the NRTL Program's list of appropriate test
standards are indicated below in Table 1:

  Table 1--Test Standards OSHA Is Adding to the NRTL Program's List of
                       Appropriate Test Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Test standard to be added               Test standard title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 970..................................  Standard for Retail Fixtures
                                           and Merchandise Displays.
UL 62841-2-17...........................  Electric Motor-Operated Hand-
                                           Held Tools, Transportable
                                           Tools and Lawn and Garden
                                           Machinery--Safety--Part 2-17:
                                           Particular Requirements for
                                           Hand-Held Routers.
UL 62841-4-1............................  Electric Motor-Operated Hand-
                                           Held Tools, Transportable
                                           Tools and Lawn And Garden
                                           Machinery--Safety--Part 4-1:
                                           Particular Requirements for
                                           Chain Saws.
UL 62841-4-2............................  Standard for Electric Motor-
                                           Operated Hand-Held Tools,
                                           Transportable Tools and Lawn
                                           And Garden Machinery--Safety--
                                           Part 4-2: Particular
                                           Requirements for Hedge
                                           Trimmers.
CSA/ANSI C22.2 No. 336..................  Particular requirements for
                                           rechargeable battery-operated
                                           commercial robotic floor
                                           treatment machines with
                                           traction drives.
UL 61730-1..............................  Standard for Photovoltaic (PV)
                                           Module Safety Qualification--
                                           Part 1: Requirements for
                                           Construction.
UL 61730-2..............................  Photovoltaic (PV) Module
                                           Safety Qualification--Part 2:
                                           Requirements for Testing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Decision To Remove Test Standards From the NRTL Program's
List of Appropriate Test Standards

    In this notice, OSHA announces the final decision to delete eight
withdrawn and deleted test standards from the NRTL Program's List of
Appropriate Test Standards. OSHA also incorporates into the NRTL
Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards a replacement test
standard for one of the withdrawn and deleted test standards (UL
61010A-2-042) as indicated below in Table 2:

       Table 2--Test Standards OSHA Is Removing From the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Deleted test standard            Test standard title       Reason for deletion    Replacement standard(s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 2231-1..........................  Personnel Protection      Standard is component     None.
                                      Systems for Electric      standard and not an end-
                                      Vehicle (EV) Supply       product standard. It
                                      Circuits: General         does not meet the
                                      Requirements.             requirements of the
                                                                NRTL Program.
UL 2231-2..........................  Personnel Protection      Standard is component     None.
                                      Systems for Electric      standard and not an end-
                                      Vehicle (EV) Supply       product standard. It
                                      Circuits: Particular      does not meet the
                                      Requirements for          requirements of the
                                      Protection Devices for    NRTL Program.
                                      Use in Charging Systems.
UL 224.............................  Extruded Insulating       Standard is component     None.
                                      Tubing.                   standard and not an end-
                                                                product standard. It
                                                                does not meet the
                                                                requirements of the
                                                                NRTL Program.
UL 969.............................  Marking and Labeling      Standard is component     None.
                                      Systems.                  standard and not an end-
                                                                product standard. It
                                                                does not meet the
                                                                requirements of the
                                                                NRTL Program.
UL 1332............................  Organic Coatings for      Standard is component     None.
                                      Steel Enclosures for      standard and not an end-
                                      Outdoor Use Electrical    product standard. It
                                      Equipment.                does not meet the
                                                                requirements of the
                                                                NRTL Program.
UL 1441............................  Coated Electrical         Standard is component     None.
                                      Sleeving.                 standard and not an end-
                                                                product standard. It
                                                                does not meet the
                                                                requirements of the
                                                                NRTL Program.
UL 1446............................  Systems of Insulating     Standard is component     None.
                                      Materials-General.        standard and not an end-
                                                                product standard. It
                                                                does not meet the
                                                                requirements of the
                                                                NRTL Program.
UL 61010A-2-042....................  Electrical Equipment for  Withdrawn and replaced..  UL 61010-1 (no direct
                                      Laboratory Use; Part 2:                             replacement for UL
                                      Particular Requirements                             61010A-2-042).
                                      for Autoclaves and
                                      Sterilizers Using Toxic
                                      Gas for the Treatment
                                      of Medical Materials,
                                      and for Laboratory
                                      Processes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Final Decision To Modify Affected NRTLs' Scopes of Recognition

    In this notice, OSHA also announces the final decision to update
the scopes of recognition of several NRTLs. The tables in this section
(Table 3 through Table 7) list, for each affected NRTL, the test
standard(s) that OSHA will delete from the scope of recognition and,
when applicable, the test standard that OSHA will incorporate into the
scope of recognition to replace one of the withdrawn (and deleted) test
standards.

     Table 3--Test Standards OSHA Is Removing From/Adding to the Scope of Recognition of CSA Group Testing &
                                               Certification Inc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Test standard to be removed        Reason for removal       Replacement test standard(s) (if applicable)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 224.............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 969.............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 1441............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 1446............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 61010A-2-042....................  Withdrawn and          UL 61010-1 (no direct replacement).
                                      replaced.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Table 4--Test Standards OSHA Is Removing From/Adding to the Scope of Recognition of Intertek Testing Services
                                                    NA, Inc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Test standard to be removed        Reason for removal       Replacement test standard(s) (if applicable)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 224.............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 969.............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 1441............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 1446............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 61010A-2-042....................  Withdrawn and          UL 61010-1 (no direct replacement).
                                      replaced.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Table 5--Test Standard OSHA Is Removing From the Scope of Recognition of TUV Rheinland of North America, Inc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Test standard to be removed        Reason for removal       Replacement test standard(s) (if applicable)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 224.............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

         Table 6--Test Standard OSHA Is Removing From the Scope of Recognition of TUV SUD America, Inc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Test standard to be removed        Reason for removal       Replacement test standard(s) (if applicable)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 969.............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

           Table 7--Test Standards OSHA Is Removing From/Adding to the Scope of Recognition of UL LLC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Test standard to be removed        Reason for removal       Replacement test standard(s) (if applicable)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UL 2231-1..........................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 2231-2..........................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 224.............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 969.............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 1332............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 1441............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 1446............................  Standard is component  None.
                                      standard and not an
                                      end-product
                                      standard. It does
                                      not meet the
                                      requirements of the
                                      NRTL Program.
UL 61010A-2-042....................  Withdrawn and          UL 61010-1 (no direct replacement).
                                      replaced.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OSHA will place on its informational web pages the modifications to
each NRTL's scope of recognition. These web pages detail the scope of
recognition for each NRTL, including the test standards the NRTL may
use to test and certify products under OSHA's NRTL Program. OSHA also
will add to the list of ``Appropriate Test Standards'' web page, those
test standards added to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test
Standards. The agency will add to the ``Standards No Longer
Recognized'' web page those test standards that OSHA no longer
recognizes or permits under the NRTL Program. Access to these web pages
is available at http://www.osha.gov/dts/otpca/nrtl/index.html.

V. Authority and Signature

    James S. Frederick, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, authorized the preparation of this
notice. Accordingly, the agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29
U.S.C. 657(g)(2)), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020 (85 FR 58393,
September 18, 2020), and 29 CFR 1910.7.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on September 27, 2021.
James S. Frederick,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2021-23893 Filed 11-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


                              Mesotrione (122990)
                     Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA)
                               November 14, 2018

What is a Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA)?
 A summary of U.S. usage for a pesticidal active ingredient by agricultural crop.
 The information presented is not proprietary, business confidential, or trade secret.
What does it contain?
 Pesticide usage statistics for a single active ingredient only.
 Available U.S., national summary statistics for pesticide usage information by crop.
 Average pounds of active ingredient applied  -  Annual average pounds of the pesticide reported applied for each agricultural crop (i.e., for surveyed states, not for the entire United States). Values are calculated by merging pesticide usage data sources together; averaging across all observations within a year for each data source, averaging across data sources within years, averaging across year, and then rounding.  Any surveyed year without reported usage for the AI is included as a value of zero pounds applied in the calculation of the average. Values are rounded using common rounding rules (i.e., the half round up method).  Note:  If the estimated value is less than 500, then that value is labeled <500.  Estimated values between 500 & <1,000,000 are rounded to 1 place value.  Estimated values of 1,000,000 or greater are rounded to the hundred thousand' place value. (Examples: 478 would be reported as ">500"; 43,873 would be reported as "40,000"; 47,873,901 would be reported as "47,900,000")
 Average percent of crop treated - Values are calculated by merging data sources together; averaging by year, averaging across all years, & rounding to the nearest multiple of 5.  Note:  If the estimated value is less than 1, then the value is labeled <1.  If the estimated value is less than 2.5, then the value is labeled <2.5.
 Maximum percent of crop treated - Value is the single maximum annual average value reported across all data sources, across all years. The value is rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5.  Note:  If the estimated value is less than 2.5, then the value is labeled <2.5.
What are the data sources used?
 USDA-NASS (United States Department of Agriculture's National Agricultural Statistics Service)  -  pesticide usage data from 2007 to 2016. (available at https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/)
 Agricultural Market Research Data (AMRD)  -  pesticide usage data from 2007 to 2016.
 California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) Pesticide Use Reporting (PUR) data for 2007 to 2016. (available at http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/pur/purmain.htm)
What should I consider when interpreting the reported data?
 The surveys sample from enough states to represent 80% or more of the crop production, in most cases. In rare cases, the survey may sample fewer states than required to reach 80% of the crop production, such deviations are based on the scope of the survey and availability of resources.
 Usage statistics are included only for surveyed crops with reported, quantitative use of the active ingredient during the sampling period (i.e., 2007 to 2016).
 Lack of reported usage data for the pesticide on a crop does not imply zero usage. There are several reasons for this.  As with any sampling data, it is possible to some usage may be overlooked. Also, even if usage is noted in data sources, it may not be quantified.  In such instances, site and associated usage are not reported in the SLUA.
 Additional registered uses may exist but are not included because the available surveys neither collect, nor report, usage for those crops (e.g., small acreage crops).
 Non-agricultural use sites (e.g., turf, post-harvest, mosquito control, etc.) are not reported in the SLUA.  A separate request must be made to receive these estimates.
 Some sites have reported usage without a registered §3 use.  This usage could be due to various factors, including, but not limited to Section 18 requests, existing stocks of the chemical, data collection errors, and experimental use permits (EUPs).

     Screening Level Estimates of Agricultural Uses of Mesotrione (122990)
                             Sorted Alphabetically
                          Reporting Years: 2007-2016
                               November 14, 2018

                                Annual Average
                             Percent Crop Treated

Crop
                               Lbs. A.I. Applied
                                    Average
                                    Maximum
                                                                              1
Almond
                                     3,300
                                    <2.5
                                    <2.5
                                                                              2
Asparagus
                                    <500
                                       5
                                       5
                                                                              3
Blueberries
                                     1,000
                                      10
                                      15
                                                                              4
Caneberries
                                    <500
                                       5
                                      10
                                                                              5
Corn
                                   2,300,000
                                      20
                                      30
                                                                              6
Oranges
                                    <500
                                     <1
                                    <2.5
                                                                              7
Pistachios
                                    <500
                                    <2.5
                                    <2.5
                                                                              8
Plums/Prunes
                                    <500
                                     <1
                                    <2.5
                                                                              9
Sorghum
                                    50,000
                                       5
                                      15
                                                                             10
Sugarcane
                                     7,000
                                       5
                                      10
                                                                             11
Sweet Corn
                                    10,000
                                      15
                                      25
                                                                             12
Walnuts
                                    <500
                                     <1
                                    <2.5

All numbers are rounded to one significant digit, except those over 1 million, which are rounded to two significant digits.
  <500: less than 500 pounds of active ingredients.
  	<2.5: less than 2.5 percent of crop is treated.
 	 <1: less than 1 percent of crop is treated.

SLUA data sources include:
  USDA-NASS (United States Department of Agriculture's National Agricultural Statistics Service)
Agricultural Market Research Data
These results reflect amalgamated data developed by the Agency and are releasable to the public.


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 67 (Friday, April 6, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14743-14745]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06822]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0268; Product Identifier 2017-NM-096-AD; Amendment
39-19242; AD 2018-07-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0100 airplanes. This AD requires
contacting the FAA to obtain instructions for addressing the unsafe
condition on these products, and doing the actions specified in those
instructions. This AD was prompted by interference between certain
passenger service unit (PSU) panels, when in the deployed/open
position, and the nearby emergency exit door cover. We are issuing this
AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective April 23, 2018.
    We must receive comments on this AD by May 21, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0268; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office
(telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2017-0113, dated June 28, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an
unsafe condition for certain Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0100
airplanes. The MCAI states:

    A report was received of an occurrence involving interference
between certain Passenger Service Unit (PSU) panels, Part Number (P/
N) A546011-501 and P/N A546011-503, when in the deployed/open
position, and the nearby emergency exit door cover.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could prevent a
complete opening of the overwing emergency exit door, possibly
obstructing the evacuation of occupants in case of an emergency
landing.
    To address this potential unsafe condition, Fokker Services
published Service Bulletin (SB) SBF100-25-131 (hereafter referred to
as `the SB' in this AD) to provide inspection instructions.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-
time inspection to verify that the overwing emergency exit doors can
be fully operated with the PSU-panels in the deployed/opened
position and, depending on findings, accomplishment of applicable
corrective action(s). This [EASA] AD also requires the reporting of
findings.

    You may examine the MCAI on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0268.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. We are
issuing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and
determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or
develop on other products of these same type designs.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    Since there are currently no domestic operators of this product, we
find good cause that notice and opportunity for prior public comment
are unnecessary. In addition, for the reasons stated above, we find
that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than
30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2018-0268; Product
Identifier 2017-NM-096-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD based on
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Currently, there are no affected U.S.-registered airplanes. This AD
requires contacting the FAA to obtain instructions for addressing the
unsafe condition, and doing the actions specified in those
instructions. Based on the actions specified in the MCAI AD, we are
providing the following cost estimates for an affected airplane that is
placed on the U.S. Register in the future:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.................................  1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85...              $0             $85
Reporting..................................  1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85...               0              85
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for the on-condition actions specified in this AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to
the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2018-07-11 Fokker Services B.V.: Amendment 39-19242; Docket No. FAA-
2018-0268; Product Identifier 2017-NM-096-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective April 23, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0100
airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 11359,
11361, 11367, 11397, 11404, 11446, 11456, 11460, 11468, 11483,
11490, 11499, 11502, 11515 and 11520.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 25, Equipment/
furnishings.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of interference between certain
passenger service unit (PSU) panels, when in the deployed/open
position, and the nearby emergency exit door cover. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct interference between certain PSU
panels and the nearby emergency exit door cover, which could prevent
a complete opening of the overwing emergency exit door, and possibly
obstruct the evacuation of occupants in case of an emergency
landing.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, request
instructions from the Manager, International Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA, to address the unsafe condition specified in
paragraph (e) of this AD; and accomplish the actions at the times
specified in, and in accordance with, those instructions. Guidance
can be found in Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2017-0113, dated
June 28, 2017.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch,
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the International Section, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
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.

(i) Related Information

    (1) Refer to MCAI EASA AD 2017-0113, dated June 28, 2017, for
related information. You may examine the MCAI on the internet at
http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2018-0268.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Tom Rodriguez,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on March 22, 2018.
Michael Kaszicki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-06822 Filed 4-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 20, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 202)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 64670-64673]
[DOCID:fr20oc10-9]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0927]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zones; Temporary Change of Date for Recurring Fireworks
Display Within the Fifth Coast Guard District, Wrightsville Beach, NC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is temporarily changing the enforcement period
of safety zone regulations for a recurring fireworks display within the
Fifth Coast Guard District. These regulations apply to only one
recurring fireworks display event that takes place at Wrightsville
Beach, NC. Safety zone regulations are necessary to provide for the
safety of life on navigable waters during the event. This action is
intended to restrict vessel traffic in a portion of Motts Channel and
Banks Channel near Wrightsville Beach, NC, during the event.

DATES: In Sec.  165.506, Table to Sec.  165.506, entry (d)14 is
effective from 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. on November 27, 2010. In Sec.
165.506, Table to Sec.  165.506, entry (d)10 is suspended effective
from November 20, 2010 through November 27, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2010-0927 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-0927 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the 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, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or e-mail Chief Warrant Officer Joseph Edge,
Prevention Department, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina, Atlantic
Beach, NC; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If
you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because publishing an NPRM is impracticable
and contrary to public interest since immediate action is needed to
minimize potential danger to the public during the event. The Coast
Guard did not receive notification of the change in the date of the
event in sufficient time to issue an NPRM and hold a comment period for
this rulemaking. The potential dangers posed by fallout from
pyrotechnic fireworks displays to vessel traffic transiting the
waterway makes this safety zone necessary to provide for the safety of
spectator craft and other vessels transiting the event area. For the
safety concerns noted, it is in the public interest to have these
regulations in effect during the event. The Coast Guard will issue
broadcast notice to mariners to advise vessel operators of navigational
restrictions. On scene Coast Guard and local law enforcement vessels
will also provide actual notice to mariners.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), and for the same reasons, the Coast Guard
finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than
30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the
effective date would be contrary to the public interest, since
immediate action is needed to ensure the safety of the event
participants, spectator craft and other vessels transiting the event
area.

Background and Purpose

    Fireworks display events are frequently held on or adjacent to
navigable waters within the boundary of the Fifth Coast Guard District.
For a description of the geographical area of each Coast Guard Sector--
Captain of the Port Zone, please see 33 CFR 3.25.
    This regulation temporarily changes the enforcement period of the
safety zone for one recurring marine event, described at (d)(10) of the
Table to 33 CFR 165.506, that is normally scheduled to occur each year
on the fourth Monday in November.
    On November 27, 2010, the North Carolina Holiday Flotilla at
Wrightsville Beach, NC will sponsor the ``2010 NC Holiday Flotilla boat
parade and fireworks''. The event will take place near Wrightsville
Beach, NC on the waters of Motts Channel and Banks Channel. The
regulation at 33 CFR 165.506 is enforced annually for this event. The
event will consist of approximately 40 sailboats and powerboats
participating in a parade in the vicinity of Wrightsville Beach, North
Carolina and conclude with a fireworks display. Also, a fleet of
spectator vessels is expected to gather near the event site to view the
parade and fireworks. To provide for the safety of participants,
spectators, and transiting vessels, the Coast Guard will temporarily
restrict vessel traffic in the event area from 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
on November 27, 2010. The regulation at 33 CFR 165.506 will be enforced
for the duration of the event. Vessels may not enter the regulated area
unless they receive permission from the Coast Guard Patrol Commander.

Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is temporarily suspending the regulations at 33 CFR
165.506 by changing the date of enforcement in the table to Sec.
165.506. The Coast Guard is temporarily changing the enforcement period
of the safety zone for this recurring event within the Fifth Coast
Guard District. This regulation applies to only one marine event listed
at (d)10 in the Table to Sec.  165.506.
    The Table to Sec.  165.506, event (d)10 establishes the enforcement
date for the ``North Carolina Holiday Flotilla''. This regulation
temporarily changes the enforcement date from the fourth Monday in
November to Saturday, November 27, 2010. The temporary safety zone will
be enforced from 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. on November 27, 2010, and will
restrict general navigation in the regulated area during the event. The
North Carolina Holiday Flotilla, which is the sponsor for this event,
holds this event annually; however, they have changed the date of the
event for 2010 so that it is outside the scope of the existing
enforcement period. Except for participants and vessels authorized by
the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel will be allowed
to enter or remain in the regulated area. These regulations are needed
to control vessel traffic during the event to enhance the safety of
participants, spectators and transiting vessels.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. Although this rule prevents traffic from
transiting a portion of Motts Channel and Banks Channel during the
specified event, the effect of this regulation will not be significant
due to the limited duration that the regulated area will be in effect
and the extensive advance notifications that will be made to the
maritime community via marine information broadcasts, local radio
stations and area newspapers so mariners can adjust their plans
accordingly. Additionally, this rulemaking does not change the
permanent regulated areas that have been published in 33 CFR 165.506,
Table to Sec.  165.506. In some cases vessel traffic may be able to
transit the regulated area when the Coast Guard Patrol Commander deems
it is safe to do so.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule would affect the following entities, some of which
might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending
to transit or anchor in Motts Channel or Banks Channel where this event
is being held. This regulation will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities because it will be enforced only
during the event that will be patrolled by the Coast Guard patrol
commander. The Captain of the Port will ensure that

small entities are able to operate in the areas where events are
occurring when it is safe to do so. In some cases, vessels will be able
to safely transit around the regulated area at various times, and, with
the permission of the Patrol Commander, vessels may transit through the
regulated area. Before the enforcement period, the Coast Guard will
issue maritime advisories so mariners can adjust their plans
accordingly.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more in any
one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we
do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule establishes a safety zone. An
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

Sec.  165.506  [Amended]

0
2. From November 20, 2010 through November 27, 2010 in Sec.  165.506,
Table to Sec.  165.506, suspend entry (d)10.
0
3. From 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. on November 27, 2010, in Sec.  165.506,
Table to Sec.  165.506, add entry (d)14 to read as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Number                    Date              Event               Sponsor               Location
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                (d) Coast Guard Sector North Carolina--COTP Zone
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
14...........................  November 27, 2010  2010 North         NC Holiday Flotilla    All waters of Motts
                                                   Carolina Holiday   at Wrightsville        Channel within a
                                                   Flotilla boat      Beach, NC.             300 yard radius of
                                                   parade and                                the fireworks barge
                                                   fireworks.                                in approximate
                                                                                position latitude
                                                                                34[deg]12'29'' N,
                                                                                longitude
                                                                                077[deg]48'27'' W,
                                                                                approximately 560
                                                                                yards south of Sea
                                                                                Path Marina,
                                                                                Wrightsville Beach,
                                                                                NC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: September 28, 2010.
Anthony Popiel,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port North Carolina.
[FR Doc. 2010-26378 Filed 10-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2283-2284]
[FR Doc No: 2012-641]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP12-292-000.
    Applicants: Dauphin Island Gathering Partners.
    Description: Dauphin Island Gathering Partners submits tariff
filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rates 2012-01-06 to be effective 1/6/
2012.
    Filed Date: 1/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120106-5069.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-293-000.
    Applicants: Trailblazer Pipeline Company LLC.
    Description: Trailblazer Pipeline Company LLC submits tariff filing
per 154.204: Negotiated Rate Filing--United Energy to be effective 1/7/
2012.
    Filed Date: 1/6/12.

    Accession Number: 20120106-5076.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-294-000.
    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.
    Description: Alliance Pipeline L.P. submits tariff filing per
154.204: TAQA Assignment CNRL to be effective 1/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 1/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120106-5077.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-295-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P. submits tariff
filing per 154.204: 01/06/12--Allocations and Curtailment to be
effective 2/6/2012.
    Filed Date: 1/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120106-5115.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-296-000.
    Applicants: Carolina Gas Transmission Corporation.
    Description: Carolina Gas Transmission Corporation's Interruptible
Revenue Sharing Filing for Period Ending October 31, 2011.
    Filed Date: 1/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120106-5119.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-297-000.
    Applicants: Shell Energy North America (US) L.P.
    Description: Joint Petition of Salmon Resources, Ltd and Shell
Energy North America (US), L.P. for Temporary Waiver of Capacity
Release Regulations and Policies, and Request for Shortened Comment
Period and Expedited Treatment.
    Filed Date: 1/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120106-5218.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/13/12.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1942-002.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C. submits tariff
filing per 154.203: Quality Interchangeability Settlement Clean up
Sheets 293, 304 to be effective 1/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 1/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120106-5118.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-254-001.
    Applicants: Gas Transmission Northwest LLC.
    Description: Gas Transmission Northwest LLC submits tariff filing
per 154.205(b): Amendment to RP12-254 to be effective 1/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 1/6/12.
    Accession Number: 20120106-5188.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/18/12.
    Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, and service can be found at:
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other
information, call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-
8659.

    Dated: January 9, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-641 Filed 1-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P