[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 3, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 60427]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24367]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13472-001]

 FFP Project 62 LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Competing Applications

    On September 4, 2012, FFP Project 62, LLC filed an application for
a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act
(FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of a hydropower project
located on the Mississippi River, near Tunica, in Pointe Coupee and
West Feliciana Parishes, Louisiana. The sole purpose of a preliminary
permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a
license application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does
not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing
activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others
without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed Raccourci Island hydrokinetic project would consist of
the following: (1) Up to 1,038 SmarTurbine generating units installed
in arrays on the bottom of the river; (2) the total capacity of the
installation would be up to 41,520 kilowatts; (3) flexible cables would
convey each arrays power to a metering station; and (4) a transmission
line would interconnect with the power grid. The proposed project would
have an average annual generation of 94,426,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh),
which would be sold to a local utility.
    Applicant Contact: Ramya Swaminathan, Free Flow Power Corporation,
239 Causeway Street, Boston, MA 02114; phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Michael Spencer,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site 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 at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-13472) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: September 27, 2012.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-24367 Filed 10-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


U. S. EPA BOARD OF SCIENTIFIC COUNSELORS Water Quality Subcommittee MEETING AGENDA December 21, 2005 10: 30 am   12: 30 pm EST Wednesday, December 21, 2005 10: 30 am Welcome and Opening Remarks Dr. Herb Windom, Chair Designated Federal Officer's Welcome Dr. Bernice L. Smith Charge Designated Federal Officer 10: 45 am Overview of the Office of Dr. Kevin Teichman Research and Development Director, Office of Science Policy 11: 00 am Overview of the Water Quality Research Dr. Charles Noss Program Water Quality National Program Director 11: 20 am Review of BOSC Charge Questions Dr. Herb Windom, Chair 11: 50 am Identification of Additional Information Needs Chair / Subcommittee  Written documentation needs  Request for specific presentations 12: 20 pm Public comments 12: 30 pm Adjourn


[Federal Register: March 17, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 50)]
[Notices]
[Page 11368-11369]
[DOCID:fr17mr09-42]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. OR09-3-000]

Western Refining Southwest, Inc. and Western Refining Pipeline
Company v. TEPPCO Crude Pipeline, LLC; Notice of Complaint Amendmemt

March 10, 2009.
    Take notice that on March 4, 2009, Western Refining Southwest, Inc.
(Western) and Western Refining Pipeline Company (Western Pipeline)
amended their complaint dated February 9, 2009 against TEPPCO Crude
Pipeline, LLC (TEPPCO). Western and Western Pipeline have amended their
Complaint in order to address their allegations regarding TEPPCO's
continued violation of the Interstate Commerce Act and the Commission's
Rules and Regulations by refusing to honor nominations made by Western
subsequent to filing of the Complaint.
    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 and 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. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the date as indicated
below. Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or
protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve
motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    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 14 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 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 e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, March 24, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-5680 Filed 3-16-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 192)]
[Notices]
[Page 51350-51351]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-114]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60741; File No. SR-NYSEAmex-2009-45]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Amex LLC; Order Approving
Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 476A (Imposition of Fines for Minor
Violation(s) of Rules)

September 29, 2009.
    On July 29, 2009, NYSE Amex LLC (``NYSE Amex'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change
amending its Minor Rule Plan (``MRP'') to incorporate additional
violations into the MRP and to increase the fine levels for certain MRP
violations. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the
Federal Register on August 26, 2009.\3\ The Commission received no
comments regarding 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. 60520 (August 18,
2009), 74 FR 43176 (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to amend its MRP to incorporate violations
for opening transactions in restricted classes, failure to report
position and account information, and failure to complete mandatory
annual training. The Exchange proposes to implement a fine schedule for
Amex Options Trading Permit (``ATP'') Holders that effect opening
transactions in restricted series of options, inconsistent with the
terms of any such restriction, in violation of Rule 916 or 916C. This
fine will consist of $1,000 for the first violation during a rolling
24-month period, $2,500 for a second violation within the same period,
and $5,000 for a third violation during the same period. The Exchange
also proposes to incorporate violations for failing to accurately
report position and account information to the Exchange on a Large
Option Position Report (``LOPR'') pursuant to Rules 906(a) and 906C(a).
This fine will consist of $1,000 for the first violation in a rolling
24-month period, $2,500 for a second violation within the same period,
and $5,000 for a third violation within the same period. The Exchange
believes that, in most cases, violations of trading in restricted
classes and violations of LOPR reporting may be handled efficiently
through the MRP. However, any egregious activity or activity that is
believed to be manipulative will continue to be subject to formal
disciplinary proceedings.\4\ The Exchange also proposes to implement a
fine schedule for individuals who fail to complete a mandatory
regulatory training program in violation of Rule 50, Commentary
.03-.04. This fine will consist of $1,000 for the first violation in a
rolling 24-month period, $2,500 for a second violation within the same
period, and $5,000 for a third violation within the same period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Notice, supra note 3, 74 FR at 43177.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange also proposes to increase fines for violations of NYSE
Amex Rules 933NY(a),\5\ 935NY,\6\ and 963NY \7\ to $1,000 for the first
violation in a rolling 24-month period, $2,500 for

a second violation within the same period, and $5,000 for a third
violation within the same period. The MRP currently provides for fines
of $1,000 for the first violation of Rule 933NY(a) in a rolling 24-
month period, $2,500 for a second violation within the same period, and
$3,500 for a third violation within the same period. The MRP currently
provides for fines of $500 for the first violation of Rule 935NY in a
rolling 24-month period, $1,000 for a second violation within the same
period, and $2,500 for a third violation within the same period. The
MRP currently provides for a fine of $500 for the first violation of
Rule 963NY in a rolling 24-month period, $1,000 for a second violation
within the same period, and $2,000 for a third violation within the
same period. The Exchange believes that, given the nature of these
violations, the current fine levels are inadequate, and that increased
fines for these violations are needed to deter future violations.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ NYSE Amex Rule 933NY(a) requires that a Floor Broker
handling an order use due diligence to execute the order at the best
price or prices available to him, in accordance with the Rules of
the Exchange.
    \6\ NYSE Amex Rule 935NY states that users may not execute as
principal orders they represent as agent unless (i) agency orders
are first exposed on the Exchange for at least one second or (ii)
the User has been bidding or offering on the Exchange for at least
one second prior to receiving an agency order that is executable
against such bid or offer.
    \7\ NYSE Amex Rule 963NY states that the highest bid/lowest
offer shall have priority over all other orders. In the event there
are two or more bids/offers for the same option contract
representing the best price and one such bid/offer is displayed in
the Consolidated Book, such bid shall have priority over any other
bid at the post. In addition, if two or more bids/offers represent
the best price and a bid/offer displayed in the Consolidated Book is
not involved, priority shall be afforded to such bids in the
sequence in which they are made. Rule 963NY also contains certain
provisions related to split-price priority and priority of complex
orders.
    \8\ See Notice, supra note 3, 74 FR at 43178.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities exchange.\9\ In particular, the
Commission believes that the proposal is consistent with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ which requires that the rules of an exchange be
designed to, among other things, protect investors and the public
interest. The Commission also believes that the proposal is consistent
with Sections 6(b)(1) and 6(b)(6) of the Act,\11\ which require that
the rules of an exchange enforce compliance with, and provide
appropriate discipline for, violations of Commission and exchange
rules. Furthermore, the Commission believes that the proposed changes
to the MRP should strengthen the Exchange's ability to carry out its
oversight and enforcement responsibilities as a self-regulatory
organization in cases where full disciplinary proceedings are
unsuitable in view of the minor nature of the particular violation.
Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposal is consistent with
the public interest, the protection of investors, or otherwise in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as required by Rule 19d-1(c)(2)
under the Act,\12\ which governs minor rule violation plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 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).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1) and 78f(b)(6).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission in no way
minimizes the importance of compliance with NYSE Amex rules and all
other rules subject to the imposition of fines under the MRP. The
Commission believes that the violation of any self-regulatory
organization's rules, as well as Commission rules, is a serious matter.
However, the MRP provides a reasonable means of addressing rule
violations that do not rise to the level of requiring formal
disciplinary proceedings, while providing greater flexibility in
handling certain violations. The Commission expects that NYSE Amex will
continue to conduct surveillance with due diligence and make a
determination based on its findings, on a case-by-case basis, whether a
fine of more or less than the recommended amount is appropriate for a
violation under the MRP or whether a violation requires formal
disciplinary action under NYSE Amex Rule 476.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\13\ and Rule 19d-1(c)(2) under the Act,\14\ that the proposed rule
change (SR-NYSEAmex-2009-45) be, and it hereby is, approved and
declared effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19d-1(c)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12); 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(44).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-23991 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 86)]
[Notices]
[Page 26357-26358]
[DOCID:fr04my06-45]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2005-0023; FRL-8166-5]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Printing, Coating and
Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles (Renewal), EPA ICR Number 2071.03,
OMB Control Number 2060-0522

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

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 June 5, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2005-0023, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:

EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency,
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code
2201T, 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, Compliance Assessment
and Media Programs Division (CAMPD), Office of Compliance, (Mail Code
2223A), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; e-mail 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 6, 2005 (70 FR 24020), 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-2005-0023, 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 B102, 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 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 http://www.regulations.gov
.

    Title: NESHAP for Printing, Coating and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other
Textiles (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 2071.03, OMB Control Number 2060-0023.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on May 31, 2006. Under
OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the
collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. 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 numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.

    Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) for printing, coating and dyeing of fabrics and
other textiles were proposed on July 11, 2002 (67 FR 46028),
promulgated on May 29, 2003 (68 FR 32172), and amended on August 4,
2004 (69 FR 47001). These standards apply to each existing, new or
reconstructed printing coating slashing, dyeing or finishing of fabric
and other textiles.
    Owners or operators of the affected facilities must make the
following notification: (1) Initial notification, (2) notification of
initial performance test, (3) notification of compliance status.
Affected sources must submit an initial compliance status report, and a
startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) plan. Respondents are also
required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any
startup, shutdown, or malfunction.
    Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this subpart
must maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at
least five years following the collection of such measurements,
maintenance reports, and records. 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.
    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 Numbers for EPA's
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 69
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: Printing, coating, and dyeing of
fabrics and other textiles facilities.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 140.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion, semiannually and initially.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 20,821.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $1,687,831 which includes $3,000
annualized capital start-up costs, $4,000 annualized O&M costs, and
annualized labor costs of $1,680,831.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 8,670 hours in the
total estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of
Approved ICR Burdens.
    The decrease in burden from the most recently approved ICR is due
to the requirements of the standard, which requires all existing
sources to be in compliance within three years. Therefore, all existing
sources are assumed to be in compliance, and the burden associated with
the initial compliance efforts no longer exists.
    There was a decrease in the capital/startup and operations and
maintenance (O&M) costs from the previous ICR. The reason for this
decrease is that we are accounting only for the number of respondents
associated with the O&M costs, not for the number of annual reports
used in the previous ICR.

    Dated: April 27, 2006.
Oscar Morales,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
 [FR Doc. E6-6748 Filed 5-3-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 193 (Wednesday, October 5, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 61730]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25700]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4027-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]

Rhode Island; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Rhode Island (FEMA-4027-DR), dated September
3, 2011, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 3, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated September 3, 2011, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Rhode Island resulting from Tropical Storm Irene during the
period of August 27-29, 2011, is of sufficient severity and
magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C.
5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such
a major disaster exists in the State of Rhode Island.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State. Direct
Federal assistance is authorized. Consistent with the requirement
that Federal assistance is supplemental, any Federal funds provided
under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation
will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Gracia B. Szczech, of FEMA is
appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major
disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Rhode Island have been
designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Bristol, Kent, Newport, Providence, and Washington Counties for
Public Assistance.
    All counties within the State of Rhode Island are eligible to
apply for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-25700 Filed 10-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 193 (Monday, October 6, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 60151]
[FR Doc No: 2014-23754]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER14-2945-000]

Roundtop Energy LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding,
of Roundtop Energy LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate schedule, noting that such application
includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of
future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability is October 20, 2014.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for 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>.

    Dated: September 30, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-23754 Filed 10-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 7, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 234)]
[Notices]
[Page 72826]
[DOCID:fr07de05-75]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP05-691-000]

CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River Transmission Corporation;
Notice of Postponement of Technical Conference

November 30, 2005.
    Take notice that the technical conference scheduled for Tuesday,
December 6, 2005, has been postponed until Tuesday, January 24, 2006,
at 10 a.m. (e.s.t.), in a room to be designated at the offices of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-6958 Filed 12-6-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 118 (Monday, June 20, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 35886]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15192]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 11068-014--California]

Orange Cove Irrigation District, and Friant Power Authority;
Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
as amended, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations (18 CFR part 380), the Office of Energy Projects has
prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) regarding Orange Cove
Irrigation District's and Friant Power Authority's request for a
capacity-related amendment of the license for the Fishwater Release
Hydroelectric Project. The project is located at the Bureau of
Reclamation's Friant Dam on the San Joaquin River in Fresno County,
California. This EA concludes that the proposed action would not
constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality
of the human environment.
    A copy of the EA is on file with the Commission and is available
for public inspection. The EA may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the
docket number (P-11068) in the docket number field to access the
document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Any comments on the EA should be filed by July 21, 2011, and should
be addressed to the Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Room 1-A, Washington, DC 20426. Please reference
the project name and project number (P-11068) on all comments. Comments
may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. The
Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``eFiling'' link. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Andrea
Claros at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 6, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-15192 Filed 6-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: February 5, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 24)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 6592-6594]
[DOCID:fr05fe08-8]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0249; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-088-AD;
Amendment 39-15361; AD 2008-03-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Alpha Aviation Design Limited Model
R2160 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD)
for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as distortion of the rudder bars due to rudder control forces
during aerobatic operation and nose wheel steering reaction forces.
Rudder bar distortion could result in reduced control or loss of
control. This AD requires actions that are intended to address the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: This AD becomes effective March 11, 2008.
    As of March 11, 2008, the Director of the Federal Register approved
the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this
AD.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
 or in person at the Docket Management Facility,

U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer,
901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816)
329-4146; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on November 27, 2007
(72 FR 66089) and proposed to supersede AD 87-08-01, Amendment 39-5601,
published in 1987 and AD 99-01-04, Amendment 39-10971, published in
1999. That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states that rudder control forces during
aerobatic operation and nose wheel steering reaction forces may cause
rudder bar distortion. Rudder bar distortion could result in reduced
control or loss of control.
    The MCAI requires you to replace the left and right rudder bars
with reinforced rudder bars.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a NOTE within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 9 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 3 work-hours per product to
comply with basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is
$80 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $657 per product.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S.
operators to be $8,073 or $897 per product.

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.

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 this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD Docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
; or in person at the Docket Management Facility

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 removing Amendment 39-5601 and
Amendment 39-10971 and adding the following new AD:

2008-03-11 Alpha Aviation Design Limited: Amendment 39-15361; Docket
No. FAA-2007-0249; Directorate Identifier 2007-CE-088-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective March
11, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 87-08-01, Amendment 39-5601; and AD
99-01-04, Amendment 39-10971.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Model R2160 airplanes, serial numbers 1
through 378, that:
    (1) Are certificated in any category; and
    (2) Have not installed the improved design rudder bars part
number (P/N) <IP_ADDRESS> and P/N <IP_ADDRESS> following either
Avions Pierre Robin Service Bulletin No. 143, dated September 8,
1995, or Alpha Aviation Service Bulletin AA-SB-27-003, dated October
19, 2007.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 27: Flight
Controls.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states that rudder control forces during aerobatic operation and
nose wheel steering reaction forces may cause rudder bar distortion.
Rudder bar distortion could result in reduced or loss of control.
The MCAI requires you to replace the left and right rudder bars with
reinforced rudder bars.

Restatement of Requirements of AD 99-01-04

    (f) For airplanes with serial numbers 250 through 378: Unless
already done, within the next 50 hours time-in-service (TIS) after
March 12, 1999 (the effective date of AD 99-01-04) replace the left
and right rudder bars, part number (P/N) <IP_ADDRESS> (left) and P/N
<IP_ADDRESS> (right), with the reinforced rudder bars, P/N
<IP_ADDRESS> (left) and P/N <IP_ADDRESS> (right) or FAA-equivalent
part numbers, following Alpha Aviation Service Bulletin AA-SB-27-
003, dated October 19, 2007.

New Requirements of This AD: Actions and Compliance

    (g) For airplanes with serial numbers 1 through 249: Unless
already done, within the next 50 hours TIS after the effective date
of this AD or within the next 3 months after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs first, replace the left and right rudder
bars, P/N <IP_ADDRESS> (left) and P/N <IP_ADDRESS> (right), with the
reinforced rudder bars, P/N <IP_ADDRESS> (left) and P/N <IP_ADDRESS>
(right) or FAA-equivalent part numbers, following Alpha Aviation
Service Bulletin AA-SB-27-003, dated October 19, 2007.

FAA AD Differences

    Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (h) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Karl Schletzbaum, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (i) Refer to New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority AD DCA/R2000/
23B, dated October 25, 2007; and Alpha Aviation Service Bulletin AA-
SB-27-003, dated October 19, 2007, for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (j) You must use Alpha Aviation Service Bulletin AA-SB-27-003,
dated October 19, 2007, to do the actions required by this AD,
unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Alpha
Aviaton, Ingram Road, Hamilton Airport, RD 2, Hamilton 2021, New
Zealand; telephone: +64 7 843 7070; fax: +64 7 843 8040; Internet:
http://www.alphaaviation.co.nz.

    (3) You may review copies at the FAA, Central Region, Office of
the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; or at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For

information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-
741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html
.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on January 23, 2008.
John Colomy,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
 [FR Doc. E8-1829 Filed 2-4-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: May 12, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 91)]
[Notices]
[Page 26841-26842]
[DOCID:fr12my10-137]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with part 211 of title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), notice is hereby given that the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) has received a request for a waiver of compliance from certain
requirements of its safety standards. The individual petition is
described below, including the party seeking relief, the regulatory
provisions involved, the nature of the relief being requested, and the
petitioner's arguments in favor of relief.

Steam Railroading Institute

[Docket Number FRA-2009-0060]

    The Michigan State Trust for Railway Preservation, Inc. (MSTRP), d/
b/a Steam Railroading Institute (SRI) petitioned FRA for relief from
the requirements of 49 CFR 223.15 Existing passenger cars and Sec.
223.13 Existing cabooses for 5 passenger cars and 2 cabooses.
Specifically, passenger cars MSTX 5576, 5581, 5646, and 762 were built
by the Canadian Car and Foundry Company in 1954. Car number 2624 was
built by the Pullman Car Company in 1950. Cabooses AA 2838 and AA 2839
were built in 1952. Since FRA's long-standing definition of
``antiquated'' is being built prior to the end of World War II, even
though this equipment is used in tourist/excursion/educational service,
relief from the Federal safety glazing requirements is required.
    A caboose listed in the petition, number PM A909, was built in
1937, thus considered by FRA to be antiquated, but over 50 years of age
from original construction. A Special Approval for continued use of
this over-age caboose will be considered under a separate proceeding.
    MSTRP primarily operates this equipment in steam and diesel
locomotive powered excursion service on the entire trackage of the
Great Lakes Central (GLC) and shared trackage utilized by GLC, the Ann
Arbor Railroad and Canadian National Railroad. MSTRP has previously and
in the future intends to operate (or lease to operators) this equipment
in excursion service on the trackage of the Rail America subsidiaries
Huron and Eastern Railway, Mid-Michigan Railroad, and Saginaw Valley
Railway. In addition, occasional operations have previously taken place
on the Lake State Railway and Saginaw Bay Southern.
    The above referenced passenger cars and cabooses have occasionally
been leased for excursion service purposes to

similar organizations in the Midwest region of the United States, and
are proposed for lease in the future. In all instances, the excursions
operate through rural and wooded areas. The coaches are used at speeds
up to and including 45 mph, and the cabooses 30 mph. There have been no
reported incidents of stoning or acts of vandalism against the
excursion trains since the start of operations, and the cars are stored
inside a protected facility when not in use.
    MSTRP is a non-profit educational organization incorporated under
Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. The main source of
income for the organization is the operation of steam and diesel
locomotive powered excursion trains. The above referenced equipment is
heavily relied upon to fund the continued operations. MSTRP believes
that bringing the passenger and caboose cars' glazing into compliance
would impose a severe financial hardship considering the intermittent
usage of the equipment in excursion service. Further, MSTRP believes
that they could not generate enough revenue to justify this expense.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-
2009-0060) and may be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Communications received within 45 days of the date of this notice
will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments
received after that date will be considered as far as practicable. All
written communications concerning these proceedings are available for
examination during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at the above
facility. All documents in the public docket are also available for
inspection and copying on the Internet at the docket facility's Web
site at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the document (or signing the
document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in
the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477) or at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC on May 6, 2010.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program
Development.
[FR Doc. 2010-11212 Filed 5-11-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


P-17-0325 Sanitized Support Documents Index:
 P-17-0325 Sanitized Determination Document (linked)
 P-17-0325 Sanitized CHEM Report (attached)
 P-17-0325 Sanitized ECO Report (attached)
 P-17-0325 Sanitized ENG Report (attached)
 P-17-0325 Sanitized EXP Report (attached)
 P-17-0325 Sanitized Fate Report (attached)
 P-17-0325 Sanitized HLTH Report_POST-FOCUS FINAL (attached)


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

January 9, 2008

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Diiodomethyl p-tolyl sulfone– Incident Report Summary

PC Code: 	101002

DP Barcode: 	344852

FROM:	Jonathan Chen, Ph.D.

	Senior Toxicologist,

	Risk Assessment and Science Support Branch (RASSB)

Antimicrobial Division (7510P)

THROUGH:	Rick Petrie

Team Leader, Team Three

RASSB / AD

		And

Norm Cook

Chief

RASSB / AD

TO:	Avivah Jakob

	Team 36

	Regulatory Management Branch II / AD

Attached is RASSB’s incident report summary associated with
Diiodomethyl p-tolyl sulfone (Amical 48).

INCIDENT REPORTS ASSOCIATED WITH

Diiodomethyl p-tolyl sulfone

 (PC CODE: 101002)

January 9, 2008

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Pesticide Programs

Antimicrobials Division

0.0	BACKGROUND tc \l1 "TABLE OF CONTENTS0.0	BACKGROUND	11.0	HAZARD
CHARACTERIZATION	22.0	AVAILABLE DATABASE	23.0	DATA GAP(S)	34.0	HAZARD
ASSESSMENT	44.1	Acute Toxicity	44.2	Subchronic Toxicity	44.3
Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity	64.4	Mutagenicity and
Carcinogenicity	74.7	Neurotoxicity	85.0	HAZARD ENDPOINT SELECTION	95.1
Acute Reference Dose (RfD) 	95.2	Chronic Dietary Reference Dose (RfD)
105.3	Occupational/Residential Exposure	105.3.1	Dermal Absorption
105.3.2	Short-Term Dermal - (1-7 Days)	115.3.3	Intermediate-Term Dermal
115.3.4	Long-Term Dermal	125.3.5	Inhalation Exposure 	125.3.6	MOEs	126.0
FQPA CONSIDERATIONS	147.0	REFERENCES	150.0	BACKGROUND

Diiodomethyl p-tolyl sulfone is a fungicide, algaecide, bacteriostat,
insecticide, and/or miticide.  It is used in drains and/grease traps in
food handling/storage establishments premises and equipment.  It is used
as materials preservative in paints (in-can), coatings, fire retardant,
adhesives, caulks, sealants, slurries,
dispersions/emulsions/solutions/suspensions, rubber products,
plastic/pvc/vinyl products, hides/leathers/leather products, textiles,
papermaking, paper and paperboard, nitrocellulose, melamine formaldehyde
thermosetting resins. It is used in septic systems in industrial
processes and water systems.  Amical is also used as a general wood
preservative.  The purpose of this report is to review the evidence of
health effects in humans resulting from exposure to Amical 48. The
potential health effects of Amical 48  in humans, reported as incident
reports from different sources, are summarized

1.0 	INCIDENT REPORT DATA ASSOCIATED WITH HEALTH EFFECTS

The following databases have been consulted for incident data:

OPP Incident Data System (IDS) - The Incident Data System of The Office
of Pesticide Programs (OPP) of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
contains reports of incidents from various sources, including
registrants, other federal and state health and environmental agencies
and individual consumers, submitted to OPP since 1992.  Reports
submitted to the Incident Data System represent anecdotal reports or
allegations only, unless otherwise stated.  Typically no conclusions can
be drawn implicating the pesticide as a cause of any of the reported
health effects.  Nevertheless, sometimes with enough cases and/or enough
documentation risk mitigation measures may be suggested.

Poison Control Centers - as the result of a data purchase by EPA, OPP
received Poison Control Center data covering the years 1993 through 2003
for all pesticides.  Most of the national Poison Control Centers (PCCs)
participate in a national data collection system, the Toxic Exposure
Surveillance System, which obtains data from about 65-70 centers at
hospitals and universities.  PCCs provide telephone consultation for
individuals and health care providers on suspected poisonings involving
drugs, household products, pesticides, etc.

California Department of Pesticide Regulation - California has
collected uniform data on suspected pesticide poisonings since 1982.
Physicians are required, by statute, to report to their local health
officer all occurrences of illness suspected of being related to
exposure to pesticides.  The majority of the incidents involve workers.
Information on exposure (worker activity), type of illness (systemic,
eye, skin, eye/skin and respiratory), likelihood of a causal
relationship, and number of days off work and in the hospital are
provided.

National Pesticide Telecommunications Network (NPTN) - NPTN is a
toll-free information service supported by OPP.  A ranking of the top
200 active ingredients for which telephone calls were received during
calendar years 1984-1991, inclusive, has been prepared.  The total
number of calls was tabulated for the categories of human incidents,
animal incidents, calls for information, and others.

2.0	SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

There are no Amical 48 specific incidences been reported in any of the
databases.

 PAGE

Page   PAGE  4  of   NUMPAGES  4


[Federal Register: August 17, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 159)]
[Notices]
[Page 46255-46257]
[DOCID:fr17au07-94]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56241; File No. SR-CFE-2007-01]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; CBOE Futures Exchange, LLC; Notice
of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating
to Block Trading

August 13, 2007.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(7) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-7 under the Act,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on July 31, 2007, CBOE Futures Exchange, LLC (``CFE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change described in Items
I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by
CFE. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on
the proposed rule change from interested persons. CFE also filed the
proposed rule change with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
(``CFTC''), together with a written certification under Section 5c(c)
of the Commodity Exchange Act (``CEA'') \3\ on July 30, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-7.
    \3\ 7 U.S.C. 7a-2(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Description of the Proposed Rule
Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend CFE Rule 415, which governs Block
Trading, to further describe: (a) The specific conditions under which
it is permissible to aggregate orders for different accounts in order
to satisfy minimum Block Trade size requirements, (b) the factors to be
considered in determining whether the price of a Block Trade is ``fair
and reasonable,'' and (c) certain aspects relating to CFE's review of
Block Trades. Although Rule 415 and these proposed rule amendments are
applicable to all of CFE's products, CFE is submitting this proposed
rule change to the Commission solely with respect to its applicability
to any security futures that may be listed for trading on CFE. The text
of the proposed rule change is available at CFE, the Commission's
Public Reference Room, and http://cfe.cboe.com/aboutcfe/.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    First, CFE is proposing to amend CFE Rule 415(a)(i) to further
specify the conditions under which it is permissible to aggregate
orders for different accounts in order to satisfy minimum Block Trade
size requirements. For each futures contract traded on CFE, there is a
separate rule chapter that governs the relevant contract and which sets
forth, among other things, the minimum Block Trade quantity for that
contract. Rule 415(a)(i) currently permits three classes of persons
(hereinafter, ``permissible persons'') to aggregate orders for
different accounts in order to meet the designated minimum Block Trade
quantity.\4\ CFE proposes amending Rule 415(a)(i) to specify that a
permissible person may only aggregate accounts that are under the
management or control of that permissible person in order to satisfy
the designated Block Trade size requirement. CFE also proposes to amend
the rule to explicitly state that, other than as described above,
orders for different accounts may not be aggregated to satisfy Block
Trade size requirements. The aggregation allowance in Rule 415(a)(i)
was intended as a narrow exception and was made available so that
permissible persons who used the same strategy for different accounts
under their same management could receive the same treatment. CFE
believes that the addition of the proposed language more clearly sets
forth the original intent of the aggregation allowance in Rule
415(a)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The three permissible persons identified in CFE Rule 415 are
(1) a commodity trading advisor registered under the CEA, (2) an
investment adviser registered as such with the SEC that is exempt
from regulation under the CEA and CFTC Regulations thereunder, or
(3) any person authorized to perform functions similar or equivalent
to those of a commodity trading advisor in any jurisdiction outside
the United States of America, in each case with total assets under
management exceeding US$25 million.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CFE additionally proposes to amend Rule 415(a)(i) to provide that
if a Block Trade is executed as a spread or combination, each leg of
the order must meet the designated minimum size set forth in the rule
chapter governing the relevant futures contract. Currently, every rule
chapter specifies that one leg must meet the minimum Block Trade
quantity for that contract (which is currently 100 contracts for each
CFE futures contract) and the other leg(s) must have a contract size
that is reasonably related to the leg meeting the

minimum Block Trade quantity. By amending Rule 415(a)(i) to refer to
the required size of each leg of the order instead of to the total
quantity of the legs (as is currently the case), the Rule will mesh
better with the provisions of these rule chapters.
    Second, CFE is proposing to add new sub-paragraph (b) to Rule 415
to set forth the factors to be considered in determining whether the
price of a Block Trade is ``fair and reasonable.'' Specifically, CFE
proposes to move the four factors already codified in sub-paragraph (c)
of Rule 415 and to add two new factors to be considered. The existing
four factors are: (1) The size of the Block Trade; (2) the prices and
sizes of transactions in the same contract at the relevant time; (3)
the prices and sizes of transactions in other relevant markets,
including without limitation the underlying cash and futures markets,
at the relevant time; and (4) the circumstances of the parties to the
Block Trade. CFE proposes adding two new factors, which are: (1) Prices
and sizes of resting book orders on the Exchange or other relevant
markets; and (2) whether the Block Trade is executed as a spread or
combination.
    CFE also proposes amending Rule 415(b) to provide that the
foregoing ``guidelines apply in determining whether the execution price
of a Block Trade that is not executed as a spread or combination is
`fair and reasonable.' These guidelines are general and may not be
applicable in each instance. Whether the execution price of a Block
Trade is `fair and reasonable' depends upon the particular facts and
circumstances. In the event the quantity present in the order book is
greater or equal to the quantity needed to fill an order of the size of
the Block Trade, it would generally be expected that the Block Trade
price would be better than the price present in the order book. In the
event the quantity present in the order book is less than the quantity
needed to fill an order of the size of the Block Trade, it would
generally be expected that the Block Trade price would be relatively
close to the price present in the order book and that the amount of the
differential between the two prices would be smaller to the extent that
the differential between the quantity present in the order book and the
Block Trade quantity is smaller.'' CFE believes that these general
guidelines will help market participants by providing them with
additional guidance regarding when the price of a Block Trade is
considered ``fair and reasonable.''
    Third, CFE is proposing to add new sub-paragraphs (i) and (j) to
Rule 415 to codify pre-existing practices and aspects of CFE's review
of Block Trades. Proposed new sub-paragraph (i) provides that the CFE
Help Desk may review a Block Trade for compliance with the requirements
of Rule 415 and may determine not to permit the Block Trade to be
consummated if the Help Desk determines that the Block Trade does not
conform with the requirements of Rule 415. Additionally, proposed new
sub-paragraph (j) provides that (i) the posting of a Block Trade by the
CFE Help Desk does not constitute a determination by CFE that the Block
Trade was effected in conformity with the requirements of Rule 415, and
(ii) a Block Trade that is posted by the CFE Help Desk which does not
conform to the requirements of Rule 415 shall be processed and given
effect but will be subject to appropriate disciplinary action in
accordance with the rules of CFE. Although this reflects current CFE
policy and practice, CFE believes it is beneficial to explicitly
reflect it in CFE's rules.
    Lastly, the proposed rule change makes some clarifying wording
changes to the current language of Rule 415, which are non-substantive.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with section 6(b) of the Act \5\ in general and section 6(b)(5) of the
Act \6\ in particular in that it provides additional detail to market
participants regarding CFE's Block Trading requirements and thus is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, and
to promote just and equitable principles of trade, and in general, to
protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    CFE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to
section 19(b)(7) of the Act.\7\ Within 60 days of the date of
effectiveness of the proposed rule change, the Commission, after
consultation with the CFTC, may summarily abrogate the proposed rule
change and require that the proposed rule change be refiled in
accordance with the provisions of section 19(b)(1) of the Act.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-CFE-2007-01 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CFE-2007-01. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be

available for inspection and copying at the principal office of CBOE.
All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CFE-2007-01
and should be submitted on or before September 7, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(73).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-16209 Filed 8-16-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 115 (Tuesday, June 16, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34242-34244]
[FR Doc No: 2015-14816]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 23

[Docket No. FAA-2015-0722; Special Conditions No. 23-265-SC]

Special Conditions: Honda Aircraft Company, Model HA-420; Fire
Extinguishing for Overwing Pylon Mounted Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Honda Aircraft
Company model HA-420 airplane. This airplane will have a novel or
unusual design feature associated with mounting the engines on the
wings in close proximity to the aft fuselage. The applicable
airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety
standards for this design feature. These special conditions contain the
additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary
to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the
existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: The effective date of these special conditions is June 16, 2015.
    We must receive your comments by July 16, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2015-0722
using any of the following methods:
    [ssquf] Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
    [ssquf] Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001.
    [ssquf] Hand Delivery of Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m., and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    [ssquf] Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://regulations.gov, including any personal information
the commenter provides. Using the search function of the docket Web
site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all comments
received into any FAA docket, including the name of the individual
sending the comment (or signing the comment for an association,
business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement can
be found in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m., and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Pretz, Federal Aviation
Administration, Aircraft Certification Service, Small Airplane
Directorate, ACE-111, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; 816-329-
3239, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has determined, in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and (d)(3), that notice and opportunity for prior
public comment hereon are unnecessary because the substance of these
special conditions has been subject to the public comment process in
several prior instances with no substantive comments received. The FAA
therefore finds that good cause exists for making these special
conditions effective upon issuance.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Special condition No.               Company/Airplane Model
------------------------------------------------------------------------
23-210-SC.............................  Adam Aircraft Model A700.
23-245-SC.............................  Cirrus Design Corporation Model
                                         SF50.
23-221-SC.............................  Embraer S.A. Model EMB-500.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. We ask
that you send us two copies of written comments.
    We will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing
date for comments. We will consider comments

filed late if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or
delay. We may change these special conditions based on the comments we
receive.

Background

    On October 11, 2006, Honda Aircraft Company applied for a type
certificate for their new model HA-420. On October 10, 2013, Honda
Aircraft Company requested an extension with an effective application
date of October 1, 2013. This extension changed the type certification
basis to amendment 23-62.
    The HA-420 is a four to five passenger (depending on
configuration), two crew, lightweight business jet with a 43,000-foot
service ceiling and a maximum takeoff weight of 9963 pounds. The
airplane is powered by two GE-Honda Aero Engines (GHAE) HF-120 turbofan
engines.
    The turbofan engines are mounted on a single pylon on each wing
near the aft fuselage. These types of aft mounted engine installations,
along with the need to protect such installed engines from fires, were
not envisioned in the development of the part 23 normal category
regulations. The performance of the airplane is such that a pilot may
not be able to locate a suitable landing site and safely land the
airplane prior to a fire escaping the fire containment capabilities of
the engine fire zone.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.17, Honda Aircraft Company must
show that the model HA-420 meets the applicable provisions of part 23,
as amended by Amendment 23-1 through Amendment 23-62 thereto.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 23) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the model HA-420 because of a novel or
unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under the
provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the model HA-420 must comply with the fuel vent and exhaust
emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise certification
requirements of 14 CFR part 36. In addition, the FAA must issue a
finding of regulatory adequacy under section 611 of Public Law 92-574,
the ``Noise Control Act of 1972.''
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in Sec.  11.19, under
Sec.  11.38 and they become part of the type certification basis under
Sec.  21.17(a)(2).
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same novel or
unusual design feature, the special conditions would also apply to the
other model.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The model HA-420 will incorporate the following novel or unusual
design features: Turbofan engines are mounted on a single pylon on each
wing near the aft fuselage not in the pilot's line of sight.
    This type of configuration was not envisioned in the development of
part 23 normal category airplanes. Therefore, a special condition for
the engine fire extinguishing system on the model HA-420 is required.
    As the extinguishing agent is subject to change during the service
life of the airplane, the certification basis must include SC 23.1195,
SC 23.1197, SC 23.1199, and SC 23.1201 in their entirety.

Discussion

    Part 23 has historically addressed fire protection through
prevention, identification, and containment. Prevention has been
accomplished by minimizing the potential for ignition of flammable
fluids and vapors. Identification has traditionally been achieved by
the location of the engines within the pilot's primary field of view
and/or with the incorporation of fire detection systems. This
philosophy has provided for both the rapid detection of a fire and
confirmation when it has been extinguished. Containment has been
provided through the isolation of designated fire zones through
flammable fluid shutoff valves and firewalls. The containment
philosophy also ensures components of the engine control system will
function effectively to permit a safe shutdown of the engine. However,
containment has only been required to be demonstrated for 15 minutes.
In the event of a fire in a traditional part 23 airplane, the
corrective action is to land as soon as possible. For a small, simple
aircraft originally envisioned by part 23, it is possible to descend
the aircraft to a suitable landing site within 15 minutes. Thus, if the
isolation means do not extinguish the fire, the occupants can safely
exit the aircraft prior to breaching the firewall. These simple and
traditional aircraft normally have the engine located away from
critical flight control systems and primary structure. This has ensured
that throughout the fire event the pilot can maintain control and
continue safe flight. It has also made predicting the effects of a fire
relatively easy. Other design features of these simple and traditional
aircraft, such as low stall speeds and short landing distances, ensure
that even in the event of an off field landing the potential for a
catastrophic outcome has been minimized.
    Amendment 23-62 applies to the model HA-420 and addresses the
concerns above by requiring engine fire extinguishing for engines
embedded in the fuselage or in pylons on the aft fuselage, but do not
address engines mounted in pylons over the wing as used on the model
HA-420. The engine fire concerns for engines mounted in overwing pylons
near the aft fuselage are the same as those associated with engines
mounted in pylons on the aft fuselage; therefore, the engine fire
extinguishing requirements included in part 23, amendments 23-1 through
23-62 apply.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
model HA-420. Should Honda Airplane Company apply at a later date for a
change to the type certificate to include another model incorporating
the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would
apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on one model of airplanes. It is not a rule of general applicability
and affects only the applicant who applied to the FAA for approval of
these features on the airplane.
    The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the
notice and comment period in several prior instances, identified above,
and has been derived without substantive change from those previously
issued. It is unlikely that prior public comment would result in a
significant change from the substance contained herein. Therefore,
notice and opportunity for prior public comment hereon are unnecessary
and the FAA finds good cause, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B)
and (d)(3), making these special conditions effective upon issuance.
The FAA is requesting comments to allow interested persons to submit
views that may not have been submitted in response to the prior
opportunities for comment described above.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 23

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Signs and symbols.

Citation

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113 and 44701; 14 CFR 21.16 and
21.17; and 14 CFR 11.38 and 11.19.

The Special Conditions

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for Honda Airplane Company model HA-420
airplanes.

1. Fire Extinguishing for Overwing Pylon Mounted Engines

SC 23.1195 Fire Extinguishing Systems

    (a) Fire extinguishing systems must be installed and compliance
shown with the following:
    (1) Except for combustor, turbine, and tailpipe sections of
turbine-engine installations that contain lines or components carrying
flammable fluids or gases for which a fire originating in these
sections is shown to be controllable, a fire extinguisher system must
serve each engine compartment.
    (2) The fire extinguishing system, the quantity of the
extinguishing agent, the rate of discharge, and the discharge
distribution must be adequate to extinguish fires. An individual ``one-
shot'' system may be used except for embedded engines where a ``two
shot'' system must be used.
    (3) The fire extinguishing system for a nacelle must be able to
simultaneously protect each compartment of the nacelle for which
protection is provided.
    (b) If an auxiliary power unit is installed in any airplane
certificated to this part, that auxiliary power unit compartment must
be served by a fire extinguishing system meeting the requirements of
paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

SC 23.1197 Fire Extinguishing Agents

    The following applies:
    (a) Fire extinguishing agents must--
    (1) Be capable of extinguishing flames emanating from any burning
of fluids or other combustible materials in the area protected by the
fire extinguishing system; and
    (2) Have thermal stability over the temperature range likely to be
experienced in the compartment in which they are stored.
    (b) If any toxic extinguishing agent is used, provisions must be
made to prevent harmful concentrations of fluid or fluid vapors (from
leakage during normal operation of the airplane or as a result of
discharging the fire extinguisher on the ground or in flight) from
entering any personnel compartment, even though a defect may exist in
the extinguishing system. This must be shown by test except for built-
in carbon dioxide fuselage compartment fire extinguishing systems for
which--
    (1) Five pounds or less of carbon dioxide will be discharged, under
established fire control procedures, into any fuselage compartment; or
    (2) Protective breathing equipment is available for each flight
member on flight deck duty.

SC 23.1199 Extinguishing Agent Containers

    The following applies:
    (a) Each extinguishing agent container must have a pressure relief
valve to prevent bursting of the container by excessive internal
pressures.
    (b) The discharge end of each discharge line from a pressure relief
connection must be located so that discharge of the fire-extinguishing
agent would not damage the airplane. The line must also be located or
protected to prevent clogging caused by ice or other foreign matter.
    (c) A means must be provided for each fire extinguishing agent
container to indicate that the container has discharged or that the
charging pressure is below the established minimum necessary for proper
functioning.
    (d) The temperature of each container must be maintained under
intended operating conditions, to prevent the pressure in the container
from--
    (1) Falling below that necessary to provide an adequate rate of
discharge; or
    (2) Rising high enough to cause premature discharge.
    (e) If a pyrotechnic capsule is used to discharge the extinguishing
agent, each container must be installed so that temperature conditions
will not cause hazardous deterioration of the pyrotechnic capsule.

SC 23.1201 Fire Extinguishing System Materials

    The following apply:
    (a) No material in any fire extinguishing system may react
chemically with any extinguishing agent so as to create a hazard.
    (b) Each system component in an engine compartment must be
fireproof.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 9, 2015.
Earl Lawrence,
Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-14816 Filed 6-15-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P