[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 18 (Friday, January 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3704-3706]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01495]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0693; FRL-9972-65]

FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel; Notice of Public Meeting and
Nominations of Ad Hoc Panel Members

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: There will be a 3-day in-person meeting of the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel
(FIFRA SAP) to consider and review Methods for Efficacy Testing of
Premises and Soil Treatment for Fire Ant Pesticides. There will also be
a 3-hour preparatory virtual meeting of the FIFRA SAP to be conducted
via webcast using Adobe Connect and telephone conferencing.
Registration will be required to attend this virtual meeting. The date
and registration instructions for the virtual meeting will be available
on the FIFRA SAP website http://www.epa.gov/sap by late February to
mid-March.

DATES: The virtual preparatory meeting will be announced in a future
Federal Register Notice and on http://www/epa.gov/sap.The in-person
meeting will be held on May 8 to May 10, 2018, from approximately 9
a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Comments. Written comments on all docketed materials should be
submitted on or before March 19, 2018. FIFRA SAP may not be able to
fully consider written comments submitted after March 19, 2018.
Requests to make oral comments should be submitted on or before April
16, 2018 by contacting the Designated Federal Official (DFO) listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. For additional instructions, see
Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Nominations. Nominations of candidates to serve as ad hoc members
of FIFRA SAP for this meeting should be provided on or before February
26, 2018.
    Webcast. The in-person meeting may be webcast. Please refer to the
FIFRA SAP website at http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap for information on
how to access the webcast. Please note that the webcast is a
supplementary public process provided only for convenience. If
difficulties arise resulting in webcasting outages, the meeting will
continue as planned.
    Special accommodations. For information on access or services for
individuals with disabilities, and to request accommodation of a
disability, please contact the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT at least 10 days prior to the meeting to allow EPA time to
process your request.

ADDRESSES:
    Meeting: The meeting will be held at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Conference Center, Lobby Level, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.),
2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA 22202.
    Comments. Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0693, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Nominations, requests to present oral comments, and requests for
special accommodations. Submit nominations to serve as ad hoc members
of FIFRA SAP, requests for special accommodations, or requests to
present oral comments to the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Marquea D. King, DFO, Office of
Science Coordination and Policy (7201M), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address: [email protected]. You may also
subscribe to the following listservs to be notified when notices
regarding this and

other SAP related activities are published.

https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USAEPAOPPT/subscriber/new?topic_id=USAEPAOPPT_101
https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USAEPAOPPT/subscribers/qualify

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action may be of interest to the public in general and those
who are or may be required to conduct testing of chemical substances
and provide submissions to the EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), FIFRA and/or Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not
attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by
this action.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. If your comments contain any information that
you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected, please contact the DFO
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT to obtain special
instructions before submitting your comments.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

C. How may I participate in this meeting?

    You may participate in this meeting by following the instructions
in this unit. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that
you identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0693 in the subject line
on the first page of your request.
    1. Written comments. Written comments should be submitted, using
the instructions in ADDRESSES and Unit I.B., on or before March 19,
2018, to provide FIFRA SAP the time necessary to consider and review
the written comments. FIFRA SAP may not be able to fully consider
written comments submitted after March 19, 2018.
    2. Oral comments. The Agency encourages each individual or group
wishing to make brief oral comments to FIFRA SAP to submit their
request to the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT on or
before April 16, 2018, in order to be included on the meeting agenda.
Requests to present oral comments will be accepted until the date of
the meeting and, to the extent that time permits, the Chair of FIFRA
SAP may permit the presentation of oral comments at the meeting by
interested persons who have not previously requested time. Oral
comments before FIFRA SAP are limited to approximately 5 minutes unless
arrangements have been made prior to April 16, 2018. The request should
identify the name of the individual making the presentation, the
organization (if any) the individual will represent, and any
requirements for audiovisual equipment. In addition, each speaker
should bring 20 copies of their oral remarks and presentation slides
(if required) for distribution to FIFRA SAP at the meeting by the DFO.
    3. Seating at the meeting. Seating at the meeting will be open and
on a first-come basis.
    4. Request for nominations to serve as ad hoc expert members of
FIFRA SAP for this meeting. As part of a broader process for developing
a pool of candidates for each meeting, FIFRA SAP staff routinely
solicits the stakeholder community for nominations of prospective
candidates for service as ad hoc members of FIFRA SAP. Any interested
person or organization may nominate qualified individuals to be
considered as prospective candidates for a specific meeting.
Individuals nominated for this meeting should have expertise in one or
more of the following areas:
    Entomologists and other scientists who are generally familiar with
pesticide efficacy testing and application methods for public health
pests including those who are specifically familiar with premises
pesticide efficacy testing for flies, cockroaches, yellow jackets,
mosquitoes, and/or ticks; and those who are familiar with pesticide
efficacy testing for control of field populations of red imported fire
ants.
    Nominees should be scientists who have sufficient professional
qualifications, including training and experience, to be capable of
providing expert comments on the scientific issues for this meeting.
Nominees should be identified by name, occupation, position, address,
email address, and telephone number. Nominations should be provided to
the DFO listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT on or before
February 26, 2018. The Agency will consider all nominations of
prospective candidates for this meeting that are received on or before
that date. However, final selection of ad hoc members for this meeting
is a discretionary function of the Agency.
    The selection of scientists to serve on FIFRA SAP is based on the
function of the Panel and the expertise needed to address the Agency's
charge to the Panel. No interested scientists shall be ineligible to
serve by reason of their membership on any other advisory committee to
a Federal department or agency or their employment by a Federal
department or agency, except EPA. Other factors considered during the
selection process include availability of the potential Panel member to
fully participate in the Panel's review, absence of any conflicts of
interest or appearance of lack of impartiality, independence with
respect to the matters under review, and lack of bias. Although
financial conflicts of interest, the appearance of lack of
impartiality, lack of independence, and bias may result in
disqualification, the absence of such concerns does not assure that a
candidate will be selected to serve on FIFRA SAP. Numerous qualified
candidates are identified for each Panel. Therefore, selection
decisions involve carefully weighing a number of factors including the
candidates' areas of expertise and professional qualifications and
achieving an overall balance of different scientific perspectives on
the Panel. In order to have the collective breadth of experience needed
to address the Agency's peer review charge for this meeting, the Agency
anticipates selecting approximately 12 ad hoc scientists.
    FIFRA SAP members are subject to the provisions of 5 CFR part
2634--Executive Branch Financial Disclosure, Qualified Trusts, and
Certificates of Divestiture, as supplemented by EPA in 5 CFR part 6401.
In anticipation of this requirement, prospective candidates for service
on FIFRA SAP will be asked to submit confidential financial information
which shall fully disclose, among other financial interests, the
candidate's employment, stocks and bonds, and where applicable, sources
of research support. EPA will evaluate the candidate's financial
disclosure form to assess whether there are financial conflicts of
interest, appearance of a lack of impartiality, or any prior
involvement with the development of the documents under consideration
(including previous scientific peer review) before the candidate is
considered further for service on FIFRA SAP. Those who are selected
from the pool of prospective candidates will be asked to attend the
public meetings and to participate in the discussion of key issues and
assumptions at these meetings. In addition, they will be asked

to review and to help finalize the meeting minutes and the final
meeting report. The list of FIFRA SAP members participating at this
meeting will be posted on the FIFRA SAP website at http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap or may be obtained from the OPP Docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

II. Background

A. Purpose of FIFRA SAP

    FIFRA SAP serves as a primary scientific peer review mechanism of
EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) and is
structured to provide scientific advice, information and
recommendations to the EPA Administrator on pesticides and pesticide-
related issues as to the impact of regulatory actions on health and the
environment. FIFRA SAP is a Federal advisory committee established in
1975 under FIFRA that operates in accordance with requirements of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. Appendix). FIFRA SAP is
composed of a permanent panel consisting of seven members who are
appointed by the EPA Administrator from nominees provided by the
National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. The
FIFRA SAP is assisted in their reviews by ad hoc participation from
members of the Science Review Board (SRB). As a scientific peer review
mechanism, FIFRA SAP provides comments, evaluations, and
recommendations to improve the effectiveness and quality of analyses
made by Agency scientists. The FIFRA SAP is not required to reach
consensus in its recommendations to the Agency but consensus is a
preferred outcome and possible under FACA.

B. Public Meeting

    EPA-registered pesticide products are an important part of pest
management programs to accomplish control of invertebrate pests. The
Agency has a number of guidelines intended to assist in the development
of appropriate protocols to test product efficacy. EPA Product
Performance Test Guidelines OPPTS 810.3100 Soil Treatment for Imported
Fire Ants and OPPTS 810.3500 Premises Treatments were published in
March 1998. To increase clarity and consistency in efficacy testing and
to include current scientific standards, the Agency is revising these
product performance guidelines. The Agency will be seeking advice and
recommendations from the SAP on scientific issues associated with the
two proposed revised EPA guidelines.
    The proposed premises treatment guideline contains recommended test
methodologies for a wide range of products intended to kill, control,
flush, and/or knockdown invertebrate premises pests, such as
cockroaches, ticks, mosquitoes, flies, and wasps. The guideline does
not cover treatment of livestock or pets, wide area-mosquito control,
or bed bug products. In addition to guidance for testing efficacy of
direct pesticide application to pests, residual treatments, and
cockroach and fly baits in the laboratory, the proposed guideline also
includes field testing methods for outdoor misting systems, Hymenoptera
nest treatments, and outdoor foggers. Finally, methods for resistance
ratio determination and characterization of pest population strain
susceptibility are described.
    The proposed red imported fire ant treatment guideline contains
recommended test methodologies for evaluating the performance of
pesticide products for the treatment and control of red imported fire
ant colonies/mounds. The guideline does not cover premises treatments
for red imported fire ant workers/foragers, such as direct application
to pests. Field tests for both mound- and area-applied pesticide
products are proposed, along with accompanying laboratory studies for
baits, barrier treatments, and insect growth regulators.

C. FIFRA SAP Documents and Meeting Minutes

    EPA's background paper, draft charge questions to FIFRA SAP, and
related supporting materials will be available on or before January 22,
2018. In addition, a list of candidates under consideration as
prospective ad hoc panelists for this meeting will be available for a
15-day public comment period in early to mid-March. You may obtain
electronic copies of most meeting documents, including FIFRA SAP
composition (i.e., members and ad hoc members for this meeting) and the
meeting agenda, at http://www.regulations.gov and the FIFRA SAP website
at http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap.
    FIFRA SAP will prepare the meeting minutes and final report
summarizing its recommendations to the Agency approximately 90 days
after the meeting. The meeting minutes and final report will be posted
on the FIFRA SAP website or may be obtained from the OPP Docket at
http://www.regulations.gov.

    Authority:  7 U.S.C. 136 et. seq.; 21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.

    Dated: January 9, 2018.
Stanley Barone, Jr.,
Acting Director, Office of Science Coordination and Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-01495 Filed 1-25-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 79 (Monday, April 26, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21530-21532]
[FR Doc No: 2010-9573]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0432; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-001-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC-8-200 and
DHC-8-300 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated 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: During a recent production fuel system test, it was found
that all three flapper valves located in each collector tank did not
conform to the design requirements, due to the fact that a valve spring
was installed on the flapper hinge pin. This valve spring should have
been removed prior to installation of the valves. With the valve spring
installed, the flapper valve is held closed by the valve spring,
preventing gravity feed. In the event of scavenge system failure, the
collector tank fuel level can no longer be maintained, potentially
leading to an in-flight engine shutdown.
    The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address
the unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 10, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec
H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com.
You may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kent Fredrickson, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion and Services Branch, ANE-173, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury,
New York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-0432;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-001-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We have lengthened the 30-day comment period for proposed ADs that
address MCAI originated by aviation authorities of other countries to
provide adequate time for interested parties to submit comments. The
comment period for these proposed ADs is now typically 45 days, which
is consistent with the comment period for domestic transport ADs.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation, which is the aviation authority
for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2009-40,
dated November 9, 2009 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI
states:

    During a recent production fuel system test, it was found that
all three flapper valves located in each collector tank did not
conform to the design requirements, due to the fact that a valve
spring was installed on the flapper hinge pin. This valve spring
should have been removed prior to installation of the valves.
    It was subsequently determined that this condition is restricted
to the 21 aircraft listed in the Applicability section above.
    With the valve spring installed, the flapper valve is held
closed by the valve spring, preventing gravity feed. In the event of
scavenge system failure, the collector tank fuel level can no longer
be maintained, potentially leading to an in-flight engine shutdown.
    In order to ensure adequate fuel transfer to the collector tank
at all times, this directive mandates a one-time [detailed]
inspection of each of the six flapper valves, removal of the valve
spring, if installed, and application of an identification mark on
each inspected valve.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Bombardier has issued Service Bulletin 8-28-54, dated April 22,
2009. The actions described in this service information are intended to
correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

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 proposed 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 proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 4 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 30 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per
work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed
AD on U.S. operators to be $10,200, or $2,550 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 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. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the 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 proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

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

    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]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2010-0432; Directorate Identifier
2010-NM-001-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by June 10, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC-8-201, -202, -
301, -311, and -315 airplanes, certificated in any category, having
serial numbers 644 through 664 inclusive.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 28: Fuel.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    During a recent production fuel system test, it was found that
all three flapper valves located in each collector tank did not
conform to the design requirements, due to the fact that a valve
spring was installed on the flapper hinge pin. This valve spring
should have been removed prior to installation of the valves.
    It was subsequently determined that this condition is restricted
to the 21 aircraft listed in the Applicability section above.
    With the valve spring installed, the flapper valve is held
closed by the valve spring, preventing gravity feed. In the event of
scavenge system failure, the collector tank fuel level can no longer
be maintained, potentially leading to an in-flight engine shutdown.
    In order to ensure adequate fuel transfer to the collector tank
at all times, this directive mandates a one-time [detailed]
inspection of each of the six flapper valves, removal of the valve
spring, if installed, and application of an identification mark on
each inspected valve.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Actions

    (g) Within 1,000 flight hours after the effective date of this
AD, do a detailed inspection of each collector tank flapper valve
for the presence of a valve spring, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 8-28-54,
dated April 22, 2009. If the valve spring is not present, before
further flight, apply an identification mark, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 8-28-54,
dated April 22, 2009. If the valve spring is present, before further
flight, remove the valve spring and apply an identification mark, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier
Service Bulletin 8-28-54, dated April 22, 2009.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: 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, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, 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: Program
Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600
Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone 516-
228-7300; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any approved AMOC on any
airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your principal
maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal avionics inspector (PAI),
as appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector, your local Flight
Standards District Office. The AMOC approval letter must
specifically reference this AD.
    (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 MCAI Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2009-40,
dated November 9, 2009; and Bombardier Service Bulletin 8-28-54,
dated April 22, 2009; for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 16, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.

[FR Doc. 2010-9573 Filed 4-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 89 (Monday, May 9, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28060-28064]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10784]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP15-554-000; CP15-554-001]

Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC; Supplemental Notice of Intent To
Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and Proposed Land and
Resource Plan Amendment(s) for the Proposed Atlantic Coast Pipeline,
Request for Comments on Environmental Issues Related to New Route and
Facility Modifications, and Notice of Public Scoping Meetings

    On February 27, 2015, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC or Commission) issued in Docket Nos. PF15-5-000 and PF15-6-000 a
Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the
Planned Supply Header Project and Atlantic Coast Pipeline Project, and
Request for Comments on Environmental Issues, and Notice of Public
Scoping Meetings (NOI). On September 18, 2015, Atlantic Coast Pipeline,
LLC (Atlantic) and Dominion Transmission, Inc. (DTI) filed applications
with the FERC in Docket Nos. CP15-554-000 and CP15-555-000 pursuant to
sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Parts 157 and
284 of the Commission's regulations. Atlantic and DTI are seeking
Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity (Certificates) to
construct, own, and operate a natural gas pipeline and related
facilities. On March 1, 2016, Atlantic filed an amendment to its
application to incorporate route and facility modifications in West
Virginia, Virginia, and North Carolina. This Supplemental Notice is
being issued to seek comments on the new pipeline route and facility
modifications and opens a new scoping period for interested parties to
file comments on environmental issues specific to these modifications.
    Information about the facilities proposed by Atlantic and DTI can
be found on our public dockets referenced above and on each applicant's
Web site at www.dom.com/corporate/what-we-do/atlantic-coast-pipeline or
www.dom.com/corporate/what-we-do/natural-gas/supply-header-project. The
FERC's environmental impact statement (EIS) will encompass all proposed
facilities and be used by the Commission in its decision-making process
to determine whether the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP) and Supply
Header Project are in the public convenience and necessity.
    The FERC will be the lead federal agency for the preparation of the
EIS. The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) is participating as a cooperating
agency because the ACP would cross the Monongahela National Forest
(MNF) and the George Washington National Forest (GWNF) in West Virginia
and Virginia. As a cooperating agency, the USFS intends to adopt the
EIS per Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1506.3 to
meet its responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) regarding Atlantic's application for a Right-of-Way Grant and
Temporary Use Permit for crossing federally administered lands. In
addition, there may be a need for the USFS to amend the MNF and GWNF
Land and Resource Management Plans (LRMP) to allow for the ACP to be
constructed on USFS lands. The EIS will also provide the documentation
to support needed amendments to the LRMPs. Additional details on the
USFS' LRMP Amendment Process is provided on page 8.
    The Commission previously solicited public input on the ACP in the
spring of 2015. We \1\ are specifically seeking comments on the new
pipeline route and facility modifications to help the Commission staff
determine what issues need to be evaluated in the EIS. Your comments
should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable
alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts
from the new route and proposed modifications. To ensure that your
comments are timely and properly recorded, please send your comments so
that the Commission receives them in Washington, DC on or before June
2, 2016. If you have previously provided comments on the ACP or Supply
Header Projects, you do not need to resubmit them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ``We,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    You may submit comments in written form or verbally. In lieu of or
in addition to sending written comments, the Commission invites you to
attend the public scoping meetings scheduled as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Date and time                          Location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, May 20, 2016, 10:00 a.m.-7:00 p.m.  Marlinton Community Wellness
                                             Center, 320 9th Street,
                                             Marlinton, WV 24954.
Saturday, May 21, 2016, 10:00 a.m.-7:00     Bath County High School, 464
 p.m.                                        Charger Lane, Hot Springs,
                                             VA 24445.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of these scoping meetings is to provide an opportunity
to verbally comment on the project modifications. You may attend at any
time during the meeting, as the primary goal of a scoping meeting is
for us to hear and document your environmental concerns. There will not
be a formal presentation by Commission staff; however, we will be
available to answer your questions about the FERC environmental review
process. Representatives of Atlantic will also be present to answer
questions about the project.
    Verbal comments will be recorded by a court reporter and
transcripts will be placed into the docket for the project and made
available for public viewing on FERC's eLibrary system (see page 12
``Additional Information'' for instructions on using eLibrary). It is
important to note that verbal comments hold the same weight as written
or electronically submitted comments. If a significant number of people
are interested in providing verbal comments, a time limit of 3 to 5
minutes may be implemented for each commenter to ensure all those
wishing to comment have the opportunity to do so within the designated
meeting time. Time limits will be strictly enforced if they are
implemented.
    This Supplemental Notice is being sent to the Commission's current
environmental mailing list for this project, including those landowners
that are newly affected by the proposed pipeline route modifications.
State and local government representatives are asked to notify their
constituents of this proposed project and encourage them to comment on
their areas of concern.
    If you are a newly affected landowner receiving this notice, a
pipeline company representative may contact you about the acquisition
of an easement to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed
facilities. The company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable
agreement. However, if the Commission approves the project, that
approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if the
easement negotiations fail to produce an agreement, the pipeline
company could initiate condemnation proceedings where compensation
would be determined in accordance with state law.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility on My Land? What Do I Need To Know?'' is available for
viewing on the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov). This fact sheet addresses
a number of typically asked questions, including the use of eminent
domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings.

Summary of Project Modifications

    In its amended application, Atlantic proposes a major route change
through the MNF and GWNF that would affect landowners in Randolph and
Pocahontas Counties, West Virginia and Highland, Bath, and Augusta
Counties, Virginia. Other, smaller route changes proposed in the
amendment would affect landowners in Nelson and Dinwiddie Counties,
Virginia; and Cumberland and Johnston Counties, North Carolina. The
amended facilities would increase the total length of the pipeline from
about 556 miles to 599.7 miles and compressor station horsepower from
40,715 horsepower to 53,515 horsepower at the proposed Buckingham
County, Virginia compressor station, all as more fully described in the
amended application. An overview map of the proposed ACP and SHP and
illustrations of these alternatives are provided in Appendix 1.
Detailed alternative route location information can be found on DTI's
interactive web mapping application at https://www.dom.com/corporate/what-we-do/atlantic-coast-pipeline.

GWNF 6 Route Modification (Randolph and Pocahontas Counties, West
Virginia; Highland, Bath, and Augusta Counties, Virginia)

    To reduce potential impacts on the Cheat Mountain salamander, West
Virginia Northern flying squirrel, and Cow Knob salamander, and to
avoid sensitive habitats and land uses, Atlantic incorporated the GWNF
6 Alternative into its proposed pipeline route between AP-1 mileposts
(MPs) 47.5 and 115.2. Relative to Atlantic's originally proposed route,
the GWNF 6 Route Modification initially heads south approximately 13
miles, passing east of Hicks Ridge and west of Kumbrabow State Forest.
The route continues south/southeast approximately 13 miles, crossing
Point Mountain and passing east of Elk Mountain and Mingo Knob. The
route enters Pocahontas County, West Virginia southeast of Mingo Knob
at Valley Mountain, and continues south approximately 8 miles, crossing
Mace, Tallow, and Gibson Knobs, passing west of the Snowshoe Ski
Resort. South of Gibson Knob, the route heads southeast approximately
17 miles, passing south of Cheat Mountain and Back Allegheny Mountain;
crossing Cloverlick Mountain, Seneca State Forest, and Michael
Mountain; and entering Highland County, Virginia just west of Big
Crooked Ridge.
    After entering Virginia, the GWNF 6 Alternative continues east
approximately 3 miles then southeast approximately 8 miles, crossing
Little Ridge, Big Ridge, and Little Mountain and passing east of Piney
Ridge. The route enters Bath County, Virginia near U.S. Highway 220,
and continues southeast approximately 14 miles, crossing Back Creek
Mountain, Jack Mountain, and Tower Hill Mountain and passing south of
Shenandoah Mountain at South Sister Knob. The route heads northeast
approximately 20 miles, passing north of Chestnut Ridge; entering
Augusta County, Virginia near Brushy Ridge; and crossing Deerfield
Valley on the east side of Shenandoah Mountain. The GWNF 6 Alternative
intersects Atlantic's filed route near MP 115.2 at Broad Draft near
West Augusta, Virginia.
    In addition to the route modification described above, Atlantic
also proposes to increase the horsepower of its proposed Compressor
Station 2 in Buckingham County, Virginia and install eight additional
valve sites.

Snowshoe Route Adjustment (Randolph and Pocahontas Counties, Virginia)

    Atlantic incorporated the Snowshoe Route Variation into its
proposed route between AP-1 MPs 66.7 and 70.1 to avoid modeled habitat
for the Cheat Mountain salamander and the Cheat Mountain Civil War
Battlefield, as well as reducing the amount of forest land and other
sensitive environmental features crossed. Relative to Atlantic's
originally proposed route, the Snowshoe Route Variation initially heads
west/southwest for 0.8 mile, crossing the main ridge on Valley
Mountain, then continuing for approximately 2.6 miles, descending
Valley Mountain, crossing Dry Fork Spring and Middle Mountain, and
entering the valley along Big Fork Spring. The route then crosses
Highway 56 in the valley, and continues to the south/southwest for
approximately 1.3 miles, ascending Tallow Knob and reconnecting to the
originally proposed route at MP 70.1.

Singleton Route Adjustment (Bath County, Virginia)

    Atlantic incorporated the Singleton Route Adjustment into its
proposed route between AP-1 MPs 91.9 and 92.7 to avoid an open-space
conservation easement held by the Virginia Outdoors Foundation.
Relative to Atlantic's originally proposed route, the Singleton Route
Adjustment is generally parallel to and within 0.3 mile of the
corresponding segment of the originally proposed route.

Horizons Village 2 Route Adjustment (Nelson County, Virginia)

    In response to our environmental information request dated December
4, 2015, and to avoid crossing the Spruce Creek Tributary Conservation
Site, Atlantic incorporated the Horizons Village 2 Route Adjustment
into its proposed pipeline route between AP-1 MPs 162.0 and 162.8.
Relative to Atlantic's originally proposed route, the Horizons Village
2 Route Adjustment would pass approximately 310 feet south of the
conservation site.

Highway 29 Route Adjustment (Nelson County, Virginia)

    In response to our environmental information request dated December
4, 2015, and to avoid an area of high slip potential, improve the
location for the crossing of Highway 29, and optimize the amount of
agricultural and open land crossed, Atlantic incorporated the Highway
29 Route Variation into its proposed pipeline route between AP-1 MPs
167.0 and 171.1. Relative to Atlantic's originally proposed route, the
Highway 29 Route Variation initially heads south for approximately 0.2
mile following a ridge to the top of Roberts Mountain, then continues
southeast for approximately 1.7 miles following a ridge to the base of
Roberts Mountain at the crossing of Davis Creek. This segment of the
route crosses Highway 29 on the same north trending finger ridge as the
proposed route, but in an area with flatter terrain at the crossing. On
the south side of the highway, the route continues to the southeast for
approximately 2.2 miles, including a 0.2-mile-long segment parallel to
Starvale Lane. The Highway 29 Route Variation reconnects to the
originally proposed route on the east side of Wheelers Cove Road at
approximately MP 171.1.

Beaver Pond Creek Route Adjustment (Dinwiddie County, Virginia)

    In response to our environmental information request dated December
4, 2015, and to reduce the number of crossings of Beaver Pond Creek and
address comments provided by the Ward Burton Wildlife Foundation,
Atlantic incorporated the Beaver Pond Creek Route Variation into its
proposed pipeline route between AP-1 MPs 256.5 and 259.3. Relative to
Atlantic's originally proposed route, the Beaver Pond Creek Route
Variation initially heads south/southwest for approximately 111.1 miles
to a point just south of Whitmore Road, then heads south for
approximately 1.6 miles over mostly upland terrain, crossing Beaver
Creek Pond in one location, reconnecting with the originally proposed
route near MP 259.3.

Juniper Farms Route Adjustment (Johnston County, North Carolina)

    Atlantic incorporated the Juniper Farms Route Variation into its
proposed route between AP-2 MPs 96.9 and 98.4 to avoid a wetland
mitigation bank, and to reduce the amount of sensitive environmental
features and constraints crossed. Relative to Atlantic's originally
proposed route, the Juniper Farms Route Variation initially heads
southwest for approximately 1.2 miles, passing east of the eastern
boundary of the mitigation bank. The route variation then reconnects
with the originally proposed route at MP 98.4 on the north side of the
Neuse River crossing.

Fayetteville Major Route Modification (Cumberland County, North
Carolina)

    In response to our environmental information request dated December
4, 2015, and to increase collocation with an existing Progress Energy
Carolinas (PEC) 500 kilovolt electric transmission line, and reduce the
number of affected property owners, the number of waterbody crossings,
and temporary wetland impacts, Atlantic incorporated the Fayetteville
Major Route Alternative into its proposed pipeline route between AP-2
MPs 133.1 and 157.5. Relative to Atlantic's originally proposed route,
the Fayetteville Major Route Alternative initially heads south/
southeast for approximately 3.9 miles to the point where it intersects
the existing PEC electric transmission line, crossing Drum Road,
Interstate 95, and Goldsboro Road. The route then heads south for
approximately 16.7 miles, parallel to and adjacent to the electric
transmission line corridor, and crosses Clinton Road and Cedar Creek
Road. The route continues west for approximately 5.5 miles, crossing
Tabor Church Road, Cape Fear River, and North Carolina State Highway 87
reconnecting with the originally proposed route near MP 157.5.

The EIS Process

    NEPA requires the Commission to take into account the environmental
impacts that could result from an action whenever it considers the
issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA
also requires us to discover and address concerns the public may have
about proposals. This process is referred to as scoping. The main goal
of the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EIS on the
important environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests
public comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EIS. We
will consider all filed comments during the preparation of the EIS.
    In the EIS we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of
the construction and operation of the proposed projects under these
general headings:

[ballot] Geology and soils;
[ballot] land use;
[ballot] water resources, fisheries, and wetlands;
[ballot] cultural resources;
[ballot] vegetation and wildlife;
[ballot] air quality and noise;
[ballot] endangered and threatened species;
[ballot] outdoor recreation and scenery
[ballot] socioeconomics; and
[ballot] public safety.

    We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed
project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to
lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    The EIS will present our independent analysis of the issues. We
will publish and distribute the draft EIS for public comment. After the
comment period, we will consider all timely comments and revise the
document, as necessary, before issuing a final EIS. To ensure we have
the opportunity to consider and address your comments, please carefully
follow the instructions in the Public Participation section beginning
on page 9.
    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and USFS also have
responsibilities under NEPA and can adopt the EIS for their own
agencies purposes. The USFS intends to use this EIS to evaluate the
effects of the ACP on lands and facilities managed by the agency and to
address any proposed amendments of applicable LRMPs that would be
necessary to make provisions for the projects.
    With this Supplemental Notice, we are asking agencies with
jurisdiction by law and/or special expertise with respect to the
environmental issues related to these projects to formally cooperate
with us in the preparation of the EIS.\2\ Agencies that would like to
request cooperating agency status should follow the instructions for
filing comments provided under the Public Participation section of this
notice. As discussed above, the USFS has expressed its intention to
participate as a cooperating agency in the preparation of the EIS to
satisfy its NEPA

responsibilities related to these projects. In addition to the USFS,
the USACE, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge, West Virginia
Department of Environmental Protection, and West Virginia Division of
Natural Resources have also agreed to participate as cooperating
agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Council on Environmental Quality regulations addressing
cooperating agency responsibilities are at Title 40, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 1501.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Actions of the U.S. Forest Service

    On November 12, 2015 Atlantic submitted a right-of-way grant
application to the USFS to construct, operate, maintain, and eventually
decommission a natural gas pipeline that crosses lands and facilities
administered by the USFS. In addition, there is a need for the USFS to
consider amending affected LRMPs to make provision for the ACP right-
of-way.
    The proposed action before the USFS has two components. First, in
accordance with the Minerals Leasing Act, the USFS would issue a right-
of-way grant in response to ACP's application for the project to occupy
federal lands. The USFS may submit specific stipulations, including
mitigation measures, for inclusion in the right-of-way grant related to
lands, facilities, and easements within its jurisdiction. Second, the
USFS may need to amend its LRMPs for the Monongahela and George
Washington National Forests if analysis shows that construction of the
ACP would not be consistent with the LRMP standards or other plan
components. In addition, the ACP, as proposed, does not follow a
designated utility corridor through the GWNF. If the proposed route
were authorized with the right-of-way grant, the GWNF LRMP would need
to be amended to change the current Management Areas in the corridor to
Management Area 5C-Designated Utility Corridors. The MNF does not have
LRMP direction that would require a similar plan amendment to
reallocate management prescriptions.
    The USFS Regional Foresters of the respective national forests have
authority to grant a right-of-way in response to Atlantic's application
for natural gas transmission on federal lands under the Mineral Leasing
Act of 1920. The Responsible Official for amendment of Forest Service
LRMPs is the Forest Supervisor of the applicable national forest.
However, the Regional Forester of the applicable national forest may
elect to be the Responsible Official for the plan amendments as well,
since the Regional Forester will be the Responsible Official for the
right-of-way grant.
    This NOI initiates the scoping process for the potential LRMP
amendments and for the issuance of the right-of-way grant. The
decisions will be tiered to the analysis contained in the FERC EIS for
the ACP. The Notice of Availability for the FERC draft EIS will contain
more detailed information associated with the LRMP amendments.

Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, we are using this notice to initiate consultation
with the applicable State Historic Preservation Offices, and to solicit
their views and those of other government agencies, interested Indian
tribes, and the public on the projects' potential effects on historic
properties.\3\ We will define the project-specific Area of Potential
Effects (APE) in consultation with the SHPOs as the projects develop.
On natural gas facility projects, the APE at a minimum encompasses all
areas subject to ground disturbance (examples include construction
right-of-way, contractor/pipe storage yards, compressor stations, and
access roads). Our EIS for these projects will document our findings on
the impacts on historic properties and summarize the status of
consultations under Section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, part 800. Those
regulations define historic properties as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the ACP and proposed USFS LRMP amendments.
Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects,
reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental
impacts. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be.
To ensure that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please
send your comments so that the Commission receives them in Washington
DC on or before June 2, 2016. If you have previously provided comments
on the ACP or Supply Header Projects, you do not need to resubmit them.
    The USFS is participating as a cooperating agency with the FERC in
this public scoping process. With this notice, the USFS is requesting
public comments on the issuance of the ROW Grant that would allow the
ACP to occupy federal land. The USFS is also requesting public comments
on the potential amendments of USFS LRMPs to make provision for the ACP
right-of-way on the Monongahela and George Washington National Forests.
    Comments on actions by the USFS should be submitted through the
FERC comment process and within the timeline described. The submission
of timely and specific comments can affect a reviewer's ability to
participate in subsequent administrative or judicial review of USFS
decisions. Comments concerning USFS actions submitted anonymously will
be accepted and considered; however, such anonymous submittals will not
provide the commenters with standing to participate in administrative
or judicial review of USFS decisions.
    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to submit
your comments to the Commission. In all instances, please reference the
appropriate project docket number (CP15-554-000 for the ACP) with your
submission. The Commission will provide equal consideration to all
comments received, whether filed in written form or provided verbally.
The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert
staff available to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Please carefully follow these instructions so that your comments are
properly recorded.
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature located on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the
link to Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for interested
persons to submit brief, text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically using the eFiling
feature located on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the
link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments
in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on ``eRegister.'' You must select the type of filing you are making. If
you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select
``Comment on a Filing;'' or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC
20426.

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's
regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property
may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within
certain distances of aboveground facilities, as well as anyone who
submits comments on the projects. We will update the environmental
mailing list as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the
information related to this environmental review to all individuals,
organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially
affected by the planned projects.
    Copies of the completed draft EIS will be sent to the environmental
mailing list for public review and comment. If you would prefer to
receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD version or would
like to remove your name from the mailing list, please return the
attached Information Request (appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EIS scoping process, you may want
to become an ``intervenor'' which is an official party to the
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the
process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard
by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling.
An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a
request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are in
the User's Guide under the ``e-filing'' link on the Commission's Web
site.

Administrative Review of USFS Decisions

    Decisions by the USFS to issue ROW Grants and amend LRMPs are
subject to administrative review. Pre-decisional objections to the ROW
Grant decisions and project-specific MNF and GWNF LRMP amendments that
are applicable only to the ACP, as provided under Title 36 of the Code
of Federal Regulations Part 219.59(b) (36 CFR 219.59[b]), may be filed
under the 36 CFR 218 regulations, Subparts A and B. For objection
eligibility (218.5), only those who have submitted timely, specific
written comments during any designated opportunity for public comment
may file an objection. Issues to be raised in objections must be based
on previously submitted specific written comments regarding the
proposed project and attributed to the objector, unless the issue is
based on new information that arose after a designated opportunity for
comment (218.8(c)). The GWNF plan amendment for the reallocation of
management areas to Management Area 5C-Designated Utility Corridors
would be subject to the pre-decisional objection process under the
regulations at 36 CFR 219, Subpart B. For objection eligibility
(219.53), only those who have submitted substantive formal comments
related to a plan amendment during the opportunities for public comment
during the planning process for that decision may file an objection.
Objections must be based on previously submitted substantive formal
comments attributed to the objector unless the objection concerns an
issue that arose after the opportunities for formal comment.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the ACP is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC or on the
FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on ``General Search,'' and enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits (i.e., CP15-554). Be sure you
have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at (866)
208-3676, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also
provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the
Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

    Dated: May 3, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-10784 Filed 5-6-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P