[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 74 (Tuesday, April 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22778-22779]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9108]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0243; FRL-9515-7]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Coke Oven Batteries

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the
nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before May 17, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2011-0243, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency,
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code
28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB
at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Learia Williams, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On May 9, 2011 (76 FR 26900), EPA sought comments on this ICR
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any additional
comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days
of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0243, which is available for public viewing
online at http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the
Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The
EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number
for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov to either submit or view public comments, access
the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further

information about the electronic docket, go to www.regulations.gov.
    Title: NESHAP for Coke Oven Batteries (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1362.09, OMB Control Number 2060-0253.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on May 31, 2012. Under
OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the
collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
    Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General
Provisions of the NESHAP at 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, and any changes,
or additions to the Provisions specified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart L.
    Owners or operators of the affected facilities must submit initial
notification, performance tests, and periodic reports and results.
Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is inoperative. Reports, at a minimum, are required
semiannually.
    All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority. In
the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are
sent directly to the EPA regional office. This information is being
collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart L, as
authorized in section 112 and 114(a) of the Clean Air Act. The required
information consists of emissions data and other information that have
been determined to be private.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for the EPA
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15, and are
identified on the form and/or instrument, if applicable.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1,908
hours per response. ``Burden'' means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Owners or operators of coke oven
batteries.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 19.
    Frequency of Response: Initially, occasionally, and semiannually.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 80,120.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $7,676,989, which includes $7,676,989
in labor costs, and no capital/startup costs or operation and
maintenance (O&M) costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of one hour in the
respondent burden hours in this ICR compared to the most recently
approved ICR due to rounding errors. This ICR was updated with more
accurate burden calculations.
    There is an increase in burden costs from the most recently
approved ICR. This increase is not due to any program changes. The
change in cost estimates occurred because this ICR uses updated labor
rates in calculating the burden costs for both the respondents and the
Agency.

John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2012-9108 Filed 4-16-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Early Action Compacts ( EACs): The June 16, 2003 Submission and Other Clarifications FROM: Lydia N. Wegman, Director Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division TO: Air Directors, Regions III, IV, VI, and VIII This memorandum responds to questions from States and local EAC areas about what needs to be included in the milestone submittals and semiannual reports due June and December 2003. As we have stated before, completion of each of the critical milestones and schedules as described in the " Protocol for Early Action Compacts Designed to Achieve and Maintain the 8 hour Ozone Standard" (" Protocol"), revised November 2002, and the November 14, 2002 memorandum from Jeffrey Holmstead to EPA Regional Administrators is essential if areas are to remain eligible for participation in the EAC program. To ensure that the 2003 submissions and subsequent milestones will be met, we are issuing this memorandum ( 1) to provide State and local air pollution control agencies some general guidelines to assist them in completing the June 16, 2003 submission; ( 2) to clarify what should be included in the semiannual reports due in June and December 2003; and ( 3) to clarify several technical requirements of the program to ensure that the attainment demonstrations being developed in conjunction with the local air quality plans are representative of current information and conditions.

1. June 16, 2003 Submission The Protocol and the November 14, 2002 Holmstead memorandum require EAC areas to identify and describe the local control measures that will be considered during the local planning process. This June 16, 2003 milestone must be met to maintain eligibility in the EAC program. This submission can be referenced in the June 2003 progress report, as described in the Section 2 of this memorandum.

We recommend that EAC areas, based on stakeholder consultation, submit by June 16, 2003 a list of candidate local control measures that is sufficient to ensure a control strategy can be developed to achieve attainment of the 8 hour ozone standard by 2007. As provided in the Protocol, areas should describe each of the local control measures under consideration. 2 As EAC areas prepare and subsequently analyze the June 2003 list of local measures, we advise the participants to work with stakeholders to consider carefully each of the following components needed to develop an attainment strategy:

° Local control measures that can reasonably be implemented in each area. Among the factors to consider are the resource and political constraints of that specific area;

° Realistic implementation dates for the control measures;

° The range of potential emissions reductions that will result from each control measure based on reasonably available information. ( In accordance with the Protocol, these local measures must be specific, quantified, and permanent, and that if approved by EPA, will be federally enforceable SIP revisions.) A list of resources containing emissions reduction estimates for specific measures can be found in the attachment to this memorandum; and ° The geographic area to which control measures could be applied.

Any public comments received in response to the June 16, 2003 submissions will be posted on EPA's EAC website at: http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ naaqs/ ozone/ eac/ .

2. June 30, 2003 Progress Report The Protocol requires local areas to assess and report every 6 months their progress against milestones in a regular, public process. At a minimum, the June 2003 progress report should do the following:

° Document progress in developing the stakeholder process, including the roles and responsibilities of various stakeholder groups, a list of stakeholders, and a brief summary of stakeholder meetings;

° Report progress on evaluating and selecting emission reduction measures for the local control strategy, including stakeholder involvement in the development of the initial list of control measures ( The June 2003 progress report can reference the June 16, 2003 submission discussed above.);

° Describe public outreach activities ( press coverage, public presentations, websites, etc.); and ° Provide an update on modeling/ technical planning activities. 3 3. December 31, 2003 Progress Report As part of the December 2003 progress report, EAC areas should address in detail each of the bulleted components discussed in section 1 above. This progress report will be an important element in EPA's consideration of whether or not to grant a deferral of the effective date of the nonattainment designation at the time of final designations in April 2004. More specifically, the progress report should address:

° A list of control measures still under consideration for adoption by the local area as part of the March 2004 submission;

° Likely implementation dates for the local control measures that are under consideration;

° Current assessment of the amount of emissions reductions expected to be achieved through implementation of the local control measures; and ° The geographical area in which each control measure is anticipated to apply.

4. Attainment Demonstration As State and local agencies move forward to develop the modeling and other technical analyses in support of attainment demonstrations for EAC areas, they have asked EPA for clarification of the modeling guidance and its application to EAC areas. As modeling demonstrations will become part of the enforceable SIP, State and local agencies should do the following:

° Follow the most recent OAQPS modeling guidance (" Draft Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses in Attainment Demonstrations for the 8 hour Ozone NAAQS," May 1999, EPA 454/ R 99 004); see: http:// www. epa. gov/ scram001/ guidance/ guide/ drafto3. pdf ;

° Model most current emissions inventory, preferably 2002; however, if 2002 is not available, use of a 1999 or later inventory for EAC modeling is acceptable;

° Base 2007 projections on 1999 emissions inventory or later;

° Use MOBILE6 in both the current and future inventories;

° Select episodes that are representative of the area's ozone problem;

° Use appropriate assumptions and emissions analysis techniques in quantifying emissions reductions. 4 Please advise your States that any deviations from the above guidance need to be reviewed by and coordinated with the EPA Regional Office. For additional clarification of these and other technical requirements, State and local agencies should refer to questions and answers related to EAC modeling issues at: http:// www. epa. gov/ scram001/ guidance/ guide/ eac ozone. pdf . This document, which will be updated periodically with additional questions as necessary, provides clarification of the current modeling guidance and its application to EAC areas.

I hope this information will be helpful to you and EAC areas as they move forward to meet the swiftly approaching milestone and semiannual reports for this year.

Any questions related to EAC policy issues should be directed to David Cole at 919/ 541 5565, while questions related to EAC modeling and attainment demonstration issues should be directed to Ellen Baldridge at 919/ 541 5684.

cc: Air Directors, Regions I, II, V, VII, IX, X Margo Oge, OTAQ Steve Page, OAQPS Peter Tsirigotis, OAQPS Joe Tikvart, OAQPS G. T. Helms, OAQPS Jan Tierney, OGC 1 ATTACHMENT Resources for Identification of Control Strategies, Emission Reduction Estimates and Emission Inventories URL Downloadable Document( s) and Websites www. epa. gov/ otaq/ transp/ costemis. pdf " Summary Review of Costs and Emission Reductions for 24 CMAQ Projects" ( September 1999)

www. epa. gov/ otaq/ transp/ publicat/ pub_ volu. htm " Quantification of Episodic Control Programs" ( EPA420 R 97 0061,

April 1997)

www. epa. gov / oms/ transp/ comchoic/ sipguide. pdf " Index of Transportation Measure Quantification Efforts: Methodology Matrix" ( EPA420 R 98 018, September 1998)

www. epa. gov/ oms/ transp/ comchoic/ sipguide. pdf " State Implementation Plan Development Guidance: Using Emission Reductions from Commuter Choice Programs to Meet Clean Air Act Requirements" ( EPA420 R 98 007, December 1998)

www. epa. gov/ otaq/ transp/ publicat/ pub_ tcms. htm " Benefit Estimates for selected TCM Programs" ( EPA420 R 98 002, July 1999)

www. epa. gov/ otaq/ transp/ publicat/ pub_ tech. htm Transportation and Air Quality ACM Technical Overviews. These documents provide overviews of individual TCMs, discussing their advantages, disadvantages, and issues involved in their implementation.

Topics: Accelerated Retirement of Vehicles, Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs, Commute Alternative Incentives, Congestion Pricing,

Guaranteed Ride Home, High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes, Intelligent Transportation Systems, Parking Management, Parking Pricing,

Improved Public Transit, Telecommuting, Traffic Flow Improvements,

Trip Reduction Ordinances, Work Schedule Changes 2 www. epa. gov/ otaq/ transp/ publicat/ pub_ mrkt. htm " Opportunities to Improve Air Quality Through Transportation Pricing Programs" ( EPA420 R 97 004, July 1997)

www. epa. gov/ otaq/ transp/ publicat/ pub_ pedo. htm " TDM Case Studies and Commuter Testimonials" ( August, 1997)

Successful transportation demand management programs are described in 19 case studies.

www. epa. gov/ dced/ pdf/ comparing_ methodologies. pdf " Comparing Methodologies to Assess Transportation and Air Quality Impacts of Brownfields and Infill Development" ( EPA 231 R 01 001,

August 2001)

PDF file will be made available on EAC website at: www. epa. gov/ ttn/ naaqs/ ozone/ eac/ " Methodologies for Estimating Emission and Travel Activity Effects of TCMs" ( EPA 420 R 94 002, July 1994)

www. epa. gov/ ttn/ chief/ Clearinghouse for Inventories and Emission Factors, including a new draft of an update to the 1999 National Emission Inventory ( March 11,

2003)

PDF file will be made available on EAC website at: www. epa. gov/ ttn/ naaqs/ ozone/ eac/ " Meeting the 15 Percent Rate of Progress Requirement Under the Clean Air Act: A Menu of Options," STAPPA/ ALAPCO, September 1993.

PDF file will be made available on EAC website at: www. epa. gov/ ttn/ naaqs/ ozone/ eac/ " Controlling Nitrogen Oxides Under the Clean Air Act: A Menu of Options," STAPPA/ ALAPCO, July 1994.

PDF file will be made available on EAC website at: www. epa. gov/ ttn/ naaqs/ ozone/ eac/ " Serious and Severe Ozone Nonattainment Areas: Information on Emissions, Control Measures Adopted or Planned and Other Available Control Measures," November 24, 1999.

www. epa. gov/ otaq/ voluntary. htm EPA Website: Transportation and Air Quality Voluntary Programs,

including Green Vehicle Guide, Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program, and Commuter Choice Leadership Initiative, U. S. EPA ( updated January 10,

2003) 3 www. epa. gov/ otaq/ transp/ traqdata. htm EPA Website: Transportation and Air Quality Planning, Clearinghouse and Databases. Includes Survey of Episodic Control Programs, Market Incentives Resource Center for Air Quality Programs, Smart Travel Resource Center, Transportation related Grants Database, and Transportation Control Measures Program Information Directory ( updated June 28, 2002)

www. epa. gov/ otaq/ transp/ landguid. htm " Improving Air Quality Through Land Use Activities." Report ( EPA420 R 01 001, January 2001)

www. epa. gov/ otaq/ transp/ traqtcms. htm EPA Website on Transportation Control Measures: On line Database;

Methodologies for Estimating Emission and Travel Activity Effects of TCMs  ( EPA420 R 97 004, July 1997)

www. trb. org Transportation Research Board Website: Quantifying Air quality and Other Benefits and Costs of Transportation Control Measures


			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on February 23, 2005

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-1996-1182

________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  Jat Airways 						Date Filed:  January 14, 2005

Relief requested: Exemption authority from 49 U.S.C. § 41301 to engage
in scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail
between Belgrade, Serbia, on the one hand, and New York, New York, and
Chicago, Illinois, on the other hand.  Jat Airways would conduct these
services pursuant to a wet lease arrangement with a duly authorized and
properly supervised U.S. or foreign air carrier.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  New authority

Applicant representative:  Bruce L. McDonald<PHONE_NUMBER>

DOT Analyst:  Gordon H. Bingham<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  United Air Lines, Inc. (United) filed comments in
response to Jat Airways’ application stating that while it does not
oppose Jat Airways’ request, it suggests that we defer action on the
request until April 2005 to allow the United States and
Serbia/Montenegro to conclude an open skies bilateral aviation
agreement.  United states that it currently holds out third-country
code-share service between the U.S. and Belgrade, via Munich, in
conjunction with Lufthansa, and may pursue additional
U.S.-Serbia/Montenegro services in the future.  In that regard, United
believes that to ensure the United States does not forfeit leverage in
the pursuit of an open skies agreement, the Department should defer
action on Jat Airways’ request until Serbia/Montenegro enters into an
open skies agreement with the United States.  Alternatively, United
urges us to limit the duration of any approval to a period of less than
180 days to allow the Department to reassess the state of the
U.S.-Serbia/Montenegro aviation relationship prior to granting Jat
Airways further authority.  No further comments were filed.

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved							Action date:  February 23, 2005

Effective dates of authority granted:  February 23, 2005-February 23,
2006

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  Reciprocity with
Serbia and Montenegro

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:

X  Standard exemption conditions (Attached)

-2-

Special conditions/Partial grant/Denial basis/Remarks:  Jat Airways may
not conduct U.S. operations with its own aircraft and crews without
further order of the Department.

The Department has considered the concerns raised by United but does not
believe, in the circumstances presented, that withholding the authority
requested by Jat Airways would further our efforts to reach an open
skies agreement with Serbia and Montenegro.

Action taken by:  Paul L. Gretch, Director

		     Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) the applicant was qualified to perform the
proposed operations; (2) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR §
385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date of
issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and the
filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

Attachment

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

(2)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1546 or 1550, as
applicable.  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing
any new service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that
would be the holder’s last point of departure for the United States,
contact its International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise
the IPSI of its plans and to find out whether the Transportation
Security Administration has determined that security is adequate to
allow such airport(s) to be served;

(3)  Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage
contained in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any
operations under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the
form of a completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation
Administration’s Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards
Service (any changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be
filed with that office);

(4)  Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

(5)  Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

(6)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(7)  Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: (a)  based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or (b)  based
on a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term "international air transportation" means "international
transportation" as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

(8)  Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

(9)  Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

(10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department's rules
governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

(11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department, with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S.
agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.

												05/2004

  By letter dated February 4, 2005, Jugoslovenski Aerotransport (JAT)
filed a request under 14 CFR Part 215 of our rules to change its name
from Jugoslovenski Aerotransport (JAT) to Jat Airways.  By letter dated
February 7, 2005, we acknowledged Jugoslovenski Aerotransport’s name
change to Jat Airways under Part 215.

  Jat Airways previously held authority in this docket to engage in
scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property and mail
between Belgrade, Serbia, on the one hand, and New York, New York, on
the other hand, but exclusively pursuant to a codeshare arrangement with
Uzbekistan Airways.  See Notice of Action Taken issued October 2, 2003,
in the present docket.  That code-share relationship has since
terminated (see Docket OST-2003-15879).

  The Republic of Serbia, together with the Republic of Montenegro, is a
constituent part of The State Union of Serbia and Montenegro.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 114 (Thursday, June 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 35624]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14060]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13011-003]

Shelbyville Hydro LLC; Notice of Availability of Environmental
Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission or FERC)
regulations, 18 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 380 (Order No.
486, 52 Federal Register 47897), the Office of Energy Projects has
reviewed Shelbyville Hydro LLC's application for an original license
for the proposed Lake Shelbyville Dam Hydroelectric Project (FERC
Project No. 13011-003) and has prepared an environmental assessment
(EA). The project would be located on the Kaskaskia River in Shelby
County, Illinois, at an existing dam operated by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. The proposed project, if licensed, would occupy a total of
3.24 acres of federal land.
    In the EA, Commission staff analyzes the potential environmental
effects of licensing the project and concludes that licensing the
project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not
constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the
quality of the human environment.
    A copy of the EA is available for review at the Commission in the
Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
202-502-8659.
    You may also register online at www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the date of this
notice. Comments may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site at  http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing,
documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an original and
five copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please affix,
``Lake Shelbyville Dam Hydroelectric Project, P-13011-003'' to all
comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lesley Kordella by telephone at 202-
502-6406 or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: June 7, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-14060 Filed 6-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 246 (Tuesday, December 23, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 76996]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29958]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL15-30-000]

San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District v. Pacific Gas and
Electric Company; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on December 12, 2014, pursuant to Rule 206 of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice
and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206 and sections 206 and 306 of the Federal
Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824e and 825e, San Francisco Bay Area Rapid
Transit District (Complainant), filed a formal complaint against
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (Respondent), alleging that the
Respondent's intent to discontinue providing electric tags (e-Tags)
needed for transmission of electricity to the Complainant from sources
outside of the California Independent System Operator Balancing
Authority Area would violate the Service Agreement for Network
Integration Transmission Service between the Complainant and
Respondent, as more fully explained in the complaint.
    The Complainant certifies that copies of the complaint were served
on the contacts of the Respondent as listed on the Commission's list of
Corporation Officials.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
``eSubscription'' link on the Web site that enables subscribers to
receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed
docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on January 2, 2015.

    Dated: December 16, 2014.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-29958 Filed 12-22-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 16, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 158)]
[Notices]
[Page 46118]
[DOCID:fr16au07-127]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56231; File No. SR-CBOE 2007-73]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change To Assess, on a
Retroactive Basis, Certain CBOE and CBSX Market Data Fees

August 9, 2007.
    On June 28, 2007, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'' or ``Exchange Act'') \1\ and
Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposal to retroactively apply certain
recently modified market data fees. The proposal was published for
comment in the Federal Register on July 10, 2007.\3\ The Commission
received no comments on the proposal. This order approves the proposed
rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56000 (July 2,
2007), 72 FR 37554.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to retroactively apply the recent increase in
monthly fees for enhanced TickerXpress (``TX'') \4\ market data from
$200 per month to $300 per month and the recently adopted fee of $100
per TX user per month for use of TX software for the use and display of
market data. The Exchange also proposes to retroactively apply CBSX's
recently adopted market data infrastructure fee, which is a monthly fee
assessed to recoup fees paid to a third-party market data vendor and
other parties to help establish facilities at CBSX through which the
third-party market data vendor can provide CBSX participants with
certain market data. The market data infrastructure fee is equal to
$19,400 divided by the number of CBSX participants receiving the market
data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ TX is an Exchange service that supplies market data to
Exchange market makers trading on the Hybrid Trading System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These changes in the Exchange's market data fees became effective
on June 1, 2007, pursuant to a previous rule change submitted by the
Exchange.\5\ The Exchange now proposes to retroactively apply these fee
changes for the period April 1, 2007, through May 31, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55882 (June 8,
2007), 72 FR 32931 (June 14, 2007) (notice of filing and immediate
effectiveness of SR-CBOE-2007-54).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\6\
Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with
section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\7\ which requires the equitable allocation
of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among Exchange members and
other persons using Exchange facilities. In approving this proposal,
the Commission notes the Exchange's statements that: (1) Retroactively
applying the TX market data fees will compensate the Exchange for its
increased costs in providing the TX data and will partially offset the
license fees paid by the Exchange to its third-party provider for
making the TX software available to users during this time period; and
(2) retroactively applying the market data infrastructure fee will
enable the Exchange to recoup the fees CBSX paid during this time
period for providing the infrastructure to make the market data
available to CBSX participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\8\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-CBOE-2007-73) be,
and it hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-16053 Filed 8-15-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: April 21, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 75)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 18138-18141]
[DOCID:fr21ap09-11]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

 [EPA-R05-OAR-2007-1045; FRL-8894-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Minnesota

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a site-specific revision to the Minnesota
sulfur dioxide (SO2) State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Olmsted
Waste to Energy Facility (OWEF), located in Rochester, Olmsted County,
Minnesota. In its September 28, 2007, submittal, the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requested that EPA approve certain
conditions contained in OWEF's revised Federally enforceable Title V
operating permit into the Minnesota SO2 SIP. The request is approvable
because it satisfies the requirements of the Clean Air Act (Act). The
rationale for the approval and other information are provided in this
rulemaking action.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective June 22, 2009, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by May 21, 2009. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2007-1045, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2007-1045. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This Facility is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. We
recommend that you telephone Christos Panos, Environmental Engineer, at
(312) 353-8328 before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christos Panos, Environmental
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. General Information
    1. What is the Background for this Action?
    2. What information did Minnesota submit, and what were its
requests?
    3. Why is EPA Taking this Action?
    4. What is a ``Title I Condition?''
II. What Action is EPA Taking?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. General Information

1. What is the Background for this Action?

    OWEF, a municipal waste combustor facility owned by Olmsted County,
is located at 301 Silver Creek Road Northeast, in Rochester, Olmsted
County, Minnesota. The facility is a district heating and cooling plant
as well as an electric power generating station. Energy is produced
mainly through combustion of municipal solid waste in two mass burn
combustion units. The other emission units are a diesel generator that
provides emergency electrical power and occasional peaking capacity and
an auxiliary boiler used when the waste combustor is going through
maintenance. Minnesota originally submitted a Title V permit for OWEF
as part of the Minnesota SO2 SIP for Olmsted County on November 4,
1998. This Title V permit contains the SO2 emission limits and
operating restrictions imposed on the facility to provide for
attainment and maintenance of the SO2 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS).

2. What information did Minnesota submit, and what were its requests?

    The SIP revision submitted by MPCA on September 28, 2007, consists
of Minnesota Air Emission Permit No. 10900005-002, issued to OWEF on
August 23, 2007, which serves as a joint Title I/Title V document. The
state has requested that EPA approve only the portions of the permit
cited as ``Title I

condition: State Implementation Plan for SO2'' into the Minnesota SO2
SIP.
    Minnesota held a public hearing regarding the SIP revision and the
joint Title I/Title V document on August 2, 2007. No comments were
received at the public meeting nor during the 30-day public comment
period.

3. Why is EPA Taking this Action?

    EPA is taking this action because the state's submittal for OWEF is
fully approvable. The SIP revision provides for attainment and
maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS and satisfies the applicable SO2
requirements of the Act.
    Under current SIP conditions, waste combustor units (EU 001 and EU
002) are equipped with Continuous Emission Monitors (CEMs) to monitor
SO2 and are collectively limited to 67 pounds per hour (lbs/hr) SO2 on
a 24-hour block average and 154 lbs/hr on a 3-hour block average. Their
combined SO2 emissions are also limited to 22.6 lbs/hr using a 365 day
rolling average through a non-SIP Title I condition which is necessary
to keep the source at non-major levels for SO2. The emergency diesel
generator (EU 003) is limited to 48,000 gallons per year of 0.05
percent sulfur content fuel oil using a 12-month rolling sum. The
auxiliary boiler (EU 004) is subject to operating restrictions when
burning fuel oil and is limited to 286,000 gallons of 0.05 percent
sulfur content fuel oil per year. The facility is required to retain
fuel oil receipts or test for the sulfur content. The SIP also contains
provisions relating to recordkeeping and the reporting of deviations
from sulfur content requirements.
    Requested changes to the facility include: (1) The addition of a
new municipal waste combustor unit (EU 007) with a capacity of 200 tons
per day, doubling the facility's total capacity; (2) the replacement of
the existing 1200 kilowatt (kW) emergency diesel generator (EU 003)
with a larger, 1750 kW emergency generator (EU 008); (3) the addition
of a stack for the new emergency generator, raising the stack height
from near ground level to about 50 feet; and, (4) the removal of the
operating restriction that prevents the operation of the auxiliary
boiler (EU 004) when more than one waste combustor is in operation,
allowing the facility the flexibility to simultaneously operate all
three combustor units and the auxiliary boiler.
    The current SIP emission limits will be maintained for the existing
waste combustor units (EU 001 and EU 002), but there will be additional
emissions limits added to the SIP based on Federal standards in 40 CFR
part 62, which will result in limited emissions of 77 parts per million
(ppm) or 16.3 lbs/hour, based on a 24-hour average. The new waste
combustor (EU 007) will have limited SO2 emissions in the SIP of 30 ppm
by dry volume, using a 24-hour geometric average based on Federal
standards found in 40 CFR part 62. The new emergency diesel generator
(EU 008), primarily used for backup and shutdown purposes, will
continue to be limited to 48,000 gallons per year of fuel oil using a
12-month rolling sum, and under most situations would not be used while
all of the waste combustor units are in continuous operation. Finally,
the auxiliary boiler (EU 004) can be fired on fuel oil or natural gas,
with a limit of 286,000 gallons per year of fuel oil.
    Further, since the last SIP revision to the facility, the existing
waste combustor units (EU 001 and EU 002) have undergone an air
pollution control retrofit project including installation of spray-
dryer absorbers (SDAs) for control of SO2 emissions. The emission rates
from the auxiliary boiler (EU 004) and the new emergency diesel
generator (EU 008), when in operation, will decrease based on a
reduction in the allowable sulfur content of the fuel to 0.0015% by
weight from the current limit of 0.05% by weight. The emergency diesel
generator will also now exhaust through a 50 foot stack, rather than a
ground-level grate, improving pollutant dispersion.
    The previous air quality dispersion modeling for the SIP, conducted
in 1998, was done prior to the installation of SO2 controls on the
existing waste combustor units (EU 001 and EU 002). The existing
emergency diesel generator (EU 003) was modeled using ``very low
sulfur'' (500 ppm) distillate oil, and exhausting through a ground-
level grate. The auxiliary boiler (EU 004) was also modeled using very
low sulfur distillate oil, resulting in various permit restrictions on
the amount of distillate oil that could be fired relative to the
operating state of Units 1 and 2.
    Revised air dispersion modeling was conducted using the AERMOD
model with Rochester meteorological data to ensure continued attainment
of the SO2 NAAQS in the area. Based on the modeling results, the
requested changes to the SIP for OWEF described above have
significantly less impacts than currently allowed under the existing
SIP. The impacts of the desired future SIP scenario, when compared to
the current operating scenarios in the SIP, were approximately 50%
lower for average annual emissions, between 2-7% lower for 24-hour
emissions and 2-12% lower for 3-hour emissions, thereby demonstrating
that emissions at OWEF will remain below the applicable SO2 NAAQS.

4. What is a ``Title I Condition?''

    SIP control measures were contained in permits issued to culpable
sources in Minnesota until 1990 when EPA determined that limits in
state-issued permits are not Federally enforceable because the permits
expire. The state then issued permanent Administrative Orders to
culpable sources in nonattainment areas from 1991 to February of 1996.
    Minnesota's consolidated permitting regulations, approved into the
Minnesota SIP on May 2, 1995 (60 FR 21447), include the term ``Title I
condition'' which was written, in part, to satisfy EPA requirements
that SIP control measures remain permanent. A ``Title I condition'' is
defined as ``any condition based on source-specific determination of
ambient impacts imposed for the purposes of achieving or maintaining
attainment with the national ambient air quality standard and which was
part of the state implementation plan approved by EPA or submitted to
the EPA pending approval under section 110 of the act * * *.'' The rule
also states that ``Title I conditions and the permittee's obligation to
comply with them, shall not expire, regardless of the expiration of the
other conditions of the permit.'' Further, ``any title I condition
shall remain in effect without regard to permit expiration or
reissuance, and shall be restated in the reissued permit.''
    Minnesota has also initiated using joint Title I/Title V documents
as the enforceable document for imposing emission limitations and
compliance requirements in SIPs. The SIP requirements in joint Title I/
Title V documents submitted by MPCA are cited as ``Title I
conditions,'' therefore ensuring that SIP requirements remain permanent
and enforceable. EPA reviewed the state's procedure for using joint
Title I/Title V documents to implement site-specific SIP requirements
and found it to be acceptable under both titles I and V of the Act
(July 3, 1997 letter from David Kee, EPA, to Michael J. Sandusky,
MPCA). Further, a June 15, 2006, letter from EPA to MPCA clarifies
procedures to transfer requirements from Administrative Orders to joint
Title I/Title V documents.

II. What Action Is EPA Taking?

    EPA is approving into the Minnesota SO2 SIP certain portions of
Minnesota Air Emission Permit No. 10900005-002, issued to OWEF on
August 23, 2007.

Specifically, EPA is only approving into the SIP those portions of the
joint Title I/Title V document cited as ``Title I condition: State
Implementation Plan for SO2.'' In addition, EPA is removing from the
Minnesota SO2 SIP all other references to Title I conditions for OWEF
that are not relevant to attainment of the NAAQS.
    We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective June 22, 2009
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written
comments by May 21, 2009. If we receive such comments, we will withdraw
this action before the effective date by publishing a subsequent
document that will withdraw the final action. All public comments
received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the
proposed action. The EPA will not institute a second comment period.
Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at
this time. If we do not receive any comments, this action will be
effective June 22, 2009.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Act. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 22, 2009. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

    Dated: March 30, 2009.
Walter W. Kovalick Jr.,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart Y--Minnesota

0
2. In Sec.  52.1220 the table in paragraph (d) is amended by revising
the entry for ``Olmsted County, Olmsted Waste-to-Energy Facility'' to
read as follows:

Sec.  52.1220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *

                                 EPA-Approved Minnesota Source-Specific Permits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    State
        Name of source            Permit No.      effective     EPA approval                Comments
                                                     date           date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Olmsted County, Olmsted Waste-     10900005-002     08/23/07  04/21/09,        Only conditions cited as ``Title
 to-Energy Facility.                                           [Insert page     I condition: SIP for SO2.''
                                                               number where
                                                               the document
                                                               begins].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-9040 Filed 4-20-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 222 (Friday, November 18, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69214-69218]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25112]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1473; Project Identifier MCAI-2022-00902-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2020-21-20, which applies to certain Dassault Aviation Model FALCON
900EX airplanes. AD 2020-21-20 requires revising the existing
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or
more restrictive maintenance requirements and/or airworthiness
limitations. Since the FAA issued AD 2020-21-20, the FAA has determined
that new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary.
This proposed AD would continue to require the actions in AD 2020-21-20
and would require revising the existing maintenance or inspection
program, as applicable, to incorporate additional new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations, as specified in a European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is proposed for incorporation
by reference (IBR). The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 3,
2023.

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 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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2022-1473; or in person at Docket Operations between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this NPRM, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The
street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For material that is proposed for IBR in this NPRM,
contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone
+49 221 8999 000; email [email protected]; website easa.europa.eu. You
may find this material on the EASA website at ad.easa.europa.eu. It is
also available at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2022-1473.
     You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, FAA, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2022-1473; Project Identifier
MCAI-2022-00902-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The
agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Tom
Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International
Validation Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]. Any commentary
that the FAA receives that is not specifically designated as CBI will
be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued AD 2020-21-20, Amendment 39-21293 (85 FR 69144,
November 2, 2020) (AD 2020-21-20), for certain Dassault Aviation Model
FALCON 900EX airplanes. AD 2020-21-20 was prompted by MCAI originated
by EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union. EASA issued AD 2020-0117, dated May 20, 2020 (EASA AD
2020-0117) (which corresponds to FAA AD 2020-21-20), to correct an
unsafe condition.
    AD 2020-21-20 requires revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate new or more
restrictive maintenance requirements and/or airworthiness limitations.
The FAA issued AD 2020-21-20 to address among other things, fatigue
cracking and damage in principal structural elements; such fatigue
cracking and damage could result in reduced structural integrity of the
airplane. AD 2020-21-20 specifies that accomplishing the actions
required by paragraph (g) or (i) of that AD terminates the requirements
of paragraph (g)(1) of AD 2010-26-05, Amendment 39-16544 (75 FR 79952,
December 21, 2010) for Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX airplanes,
serial number (S/N) 97 and S/Ns 120 and higher. This proposed AD would
therefore continue to allow that terminating action.

Actions Since AD 2020-21-20 Was Issued

    Since the FAA issued AD 2020-21-20, EASA superseded EASA AD 2020-
0117 and issued EASA AD 2022-0141, dated July 7, 2022 (EASA AD 2022-
0141) (referred to after this as the MCAI), for certain Dassault
Aviation Model FALCON 900EX airplanes. The MCAI states that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations have been developed.
    Airplanes with an original airworthiness certificate or original
export certificate of airworthiness issued after November 15, 2021 must
comply with the airworthiness limitations specified as part of the
approved type design and referenced on the type certificate data sheet;
this proposed AD therefore does not include those airplanes in the
applicability.
    The FAA is proposing this AD to address, among other things,
fatigue cracking and damage in principal structural elements. The
unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in reduced structural
integrity of the airplane. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2022-1473.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed EASA AD 2022-0141. This service information
specifies new or more restrictive airworthiness limitations for
airplane structures and safe life limits.
    This proposed AD would also require EASA AD 2020-0117, dated May
20, 2020, which the Director of the Federal Register approved for
incorporation by reference as of December 7, 2020 (85 FR 69144,
November 2, 2020).
    This material is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in ADDRESSES.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, it
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
described above. The FAA is issuing this NPRM after determining that
the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop

in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would retain all requirements of AD 2020-21-20.
This proposed AD would also require revising the existing maintenance
or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate additional new or
more restrictive airworthiness limitations, which are specified in EASA
AD 2022-0141 already described, as proposed for incorporation by
reference. Any differences with EASA AD 2022-0141 are identified as
exceptions in the regulatory text of this AD.
    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new actions (e.g., inspections).
Compliance with these actions is required by 14 CFR 91.403(c). For
airplanes that have been previously modified, altered, or repaired in
the areas addressed by this proposed AD, the operator may not be able
to accomplish the actions described in the revisions. In this
situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request
approval for an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) according to
paragraph (n)(1) of this proposed AD.

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, the
FAA proposes to retain the IBR of EASA AD 2020-0117 and incorporate
EASA AD 2022-0141 by reference in the FAA final rule. This proposed AD
would, therefore, require compliance with EASA AD 2022-0141 and EASA AD
2020-0117 through that incorporation, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular
section in EASA AD 2022-0141 or EASA AD 2020-0117 does not mean that
operators need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD
requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance times,''
compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section
titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in EASA AD 2022-
0141 or EASA AD 2020-0117. Service information required by EASA AD
2022-0141 and EASA AD 2020-0117 for compliance will be available at
regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2022-1473
after the FAA final rule is published.

Airworthiness Limitation ADs Using the New Process

    The FAA's process of incorporating by reference MCAI ADs as the
primary source of information for compliance with corresponding FAA ADs
has been limited to certain MCAI ADs (primarily those with service
bulletins as the primary source of information for accomplishing the
actions required by the FAA AD). However, the FAA is now expanding the
process to include MCAI ADs that require a change to airworthiness
limitation documents, such as airworthiness limitation sections.
    For these ADs that incorporate by reference an MCAI AD that changes
airworthiness limitations, the FAA requirements are unchanged.
Operators must revise the existing maintenance or inspection program,
as applicable, to incorporate the information specified in the new
airworthiness limitation document. The airworthiness limitations must
be followed according to 14 CFR 91.403(c) and 91.409(e).
    The previous format of the airworthiness limitation ADs included a
paragraph that specified that no alternative actions (e.g.,
inspections) or intervals may be used unless the actions and intervals
are approved as an AMOC in accordance with the procedures specified in
the AMOCs paragraph under ``Additional AD Provisions.'' This new format
includes a ``New Provisions for Alternative Actions and Intervals''
paragraph that does not specifically refer to AMOCs, but operators may
still request an AMOC to use an alternative action or interval.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 191 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following
costs to comply with this proposed AD:
    The FAA estimates the total cost per operator for the retained
actions from AD 2020-21-20 to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-
hour).
    The FAA has determined that revising the existing maintenance or
inspection program takes an average of 90 work-hours per operator,
although the agency recognizes that this number may vary from operator
to operator. Since operators incorporate maintenance or inspection
program changes for their affected fleet(s), the FAA has determined
that a per-operator estimate is more accurate than a per-airplane
estimate.
    The FAA estimates the total cost per operator for the new proposed
actions to be $7,650 (90 work-hours x $85 per work-hour).

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.
    The FAA is 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.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would 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.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2020-21-20, Amendment 39-21293
(85 FR 69144, November 2, 2020); and
0
b. Adding the following new AD:

Dassault Aviation: Docket No. FAA-2022-1473; Project Identifier
MCAI-2022-00902-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by January 3, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    (1) This AD replaces AD 2020-21-20, Amendment 39-21293 (85 FR
69144, November 2, 2020) (AD 2020-21-20).
    (2) This AD affects AD 2010-26-05, Amendment 39-16544 (75 FR
79952, December 21, 2010) (AD 2010-26-05).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX
airplanes, serial number (S/N) 97 and S/Ns 120 and higher,
certificated in any category, with an original airworthiness
certificate or original export certificate of airworthiness issued
on or before November 15, 2021.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 05, Time Limits/
Maintenance Checks.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a determination that new or more
restrictive airworthiness limitations are necessary. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address, among other things, fatigue cracking and
damage in principal structural elements. The unsafe condition, if
not addressed, could result in reduced structural integrity of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Revision of the Existing Maintenance or Inspection
Program, With a New Terminating Action

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD
2020-21-20, with a new terminating action. For airplanes with an
original airworthiness certificate or original export certificate of
airworthiness issued on or before October 2, 2019: Except as
specified in paragraph (h) of this AD, comply with all required
actions and compliance times specified in, and in accordance with,
European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2020-0117, dated May
20, 2020 (EASA AD 2020-0117). Accomplishing the revision of the
existing maintenance or inspection program required by paragraph (j)
of this AD terminates the requirements of this paragraph.

(h) Retained Exceptions to EASA AD 2020-0117 With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the exceptions specified in paragraph
(j) of AD 2020-21-20, with no changes.
    (1) The requirements specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of EASA
AD 2020-0117 do not apply to this AD.
    (2) Paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2020-0117 specifies revising ``the
approved AMP'' within 12 months after its effective date, but this
AD requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program,
as applicable, to incorporate the ``limitations, tasks and
associated thresholds and intervals'' specified in paragraph (3) of
EASA AD 2020-0117 within 90 days after December 7, 2020 (the
effective date of AD 2020-21-20).
    (3) The initial compliance time for doing the tasks specified in
paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2020-0117 is at the applicable ``associated
thresholds'' specified in paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2020-0117, or
within 90 days after December 7, 2020 (the effective date of AD
2020-21-20), whichever occurs later.
    (4) The provisions specified in paragraphs (4) and (5) of EASA
AD 2020-0117 do not apply to this AD.
    (5) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2020-0117 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) Retained Restrictions on Alternative Actions and Intervals, With a
New Exception

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (k) of AD
2020-21-20, with a new exception. Except as required by paragraph
(j) of this AD, after the maintenance or inspection program has been
revised as required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) and intervals are allowed unless they
are approved as specified in the provisions of the ``Ref.
Publications'' section of EASA AD 2020-0117.

(j) New Revision of the Existing Maintenance or Inspection Program

    Except as specified in paragraph (k) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2022-0141, dated July 7, 2022.
Accomplishing the revision of the existing maintenance or inspection
program required by this paragraph terminates the requirements of
paragraph (g) of this AD.

(k) Exceptions to EASA AD 2022-0141

    (1) The requirements specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of EASA
AD 2022-0141 do not apply to this AD.
    (2) Paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2022-0141 specifies revising ``the
approved AMP'' within 12 months after its effective date, but this
AD requires revising the existing maintenance or inspection program,
as applicable, within 90 days after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) The initial compliance time for doing the tasks specified in
paragraph (3) of EASA 2022-0141 is at the applicable ``limitations''
and ``associated thresholds'' as incorporated by the requirements of
paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2022-0141, or within 90 days after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (4) The provisions specified in paragraphs (4) and (5) of EASA
AD 2022-0141 do not apply to this AD.
    (5) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2022-0141 does not apply
to this AD.

(l) New Provisions for Alternative Actions and Intervals

    After the existing maintenance or inspection program has been
revised as required by paragraph (j) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) and intervals are allowed unless they
are approved as specified in the provisions of the ``Ref.
Publications'' section of EASA AD 2022-0141.

(m) Terminating Action for Certain Actions in AD 2010-26-05

    Accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (g) or (j) of
this AD terminates the requirements of paragraph (g)(1) of AD 2010-
26-05, for Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX airplanes, S/N 97
and S/Ns 120 and higher only.

(n) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Validation 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 responsible Flight Standards Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the International
Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified
in paragraph (o) 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 responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Dassault Aviation's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(o) Additional Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Tom Rodriguez,
Aerospace Engineer, Large Aircraft Section, International Validation
Branch, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone
206-231-3226; email [email protected].

(p) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
[DATE 35 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE].
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2022-0141,
dated July 7, 2022.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
December 7, 2020 (85 FR 69144, November 2, 2020).
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2020-0117,
dated May 20, 2020.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (5) For EASA ADs 2020-0117 and 2022-0141, contact EASA, Konrad-
Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000;
email [email protected]; website easa.europa.eu. You may find these
EASA ADs on the EASA website at ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (6) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (7) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on November 9, 2022.
Christina Underwood,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-25112 Filed 11-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P