[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 170 (Thursday, September 1, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 54479]
[FR Doc No: 2011-22401]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1997-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]

Indiana; Amendment No. 4 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for State of Indiana (FEMA-1997-DR), dated June 23, 2011, and related
determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: August 23, 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: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Gregory W.
Eaton, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer
for this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Donald L. Keldsen as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    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. 2011-22401 Filed 8-31-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 130 (Monday, July 8, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32455-32456]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14453]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 1394-080]

Southern California Edison; Notice of Intent To File License
Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document (Pad), Commencement of
Pre-Filing Process, and Scoping; Request for Comments on the Pad and
Scoping Document, and Identification of Issues and Associated Study
Requests

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application for
a New License and Commencing Pre-filing Process.
    b. Project No.: 1394-080.
    c. Date Filed: May 1, 2019.
    d. Submitted By: Southern California Edison.
    e. Name of Project: Bishop Creek Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On Bishop Creek in Inyo County, California. The
project occupies approximately 734 acres of federal land administered
by the U.S. Forest Service and approximately 48 acres of federal land
administered by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR part 5 of the Commission's
Regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Matthew Woodhall, Project Lead,
Southern California Edison Company, 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue, Rosemead,
CA 91770.
    i. FERC Contact: Kelly Wolcott at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests described in item o below. Cooperating agencies should note
the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation
of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See 94 FERC ]
61,076 (2001).
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with:
(a) The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA Fisheries under
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency
regulations thereunder at 50 CFR, Part 402 and (b) the State Historic
Preservation Officer, as required by section 106, National Historic
Preservation Act, and the implementing regulations of the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. With this notice, we are designating Southern California Edison,
as the Commission's non-federal representatives for carrying out
informal consultation, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act and section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
    m. Southern California Edison filed with the Commission a Pre-
Application Document (PAD; including a proposed process plan and
schedule), pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    n. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website
(http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction
(by appointment only) at: Bishop Creek Hydro Headquarters Office, 4000
E Bishop Creek Road, Bishop, CA 93514.
    o. Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    p. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the PAD and
Commission's staff Scoping Document 1 (SD1), as well as study requests.
All comments on the PAD and SD1, and study requests should be sent to
the address above in paragraph h. In addition, all comments on the PAD
and SD1, study requests, requests for cooperating agency status, and
all communications to and from Commission staff related to the merits
of the potential application must be filed with the Commission.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
all documents using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected] In lieu of electronic filing, you may send
a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing
should include docket number P-1394-080.
    All filings with the Commission must bear the appropriate heading:
``Comments on Pre-Application Document,'' ``Study Requests,''
``Comments on Scoping Document 1,'' ``Request for Cooperating Agency
Status,'' or ``Communications to and from Commission Staff.'' Any
individual or entity interested in submitting study requests,
commenting on the PAD or SD1, and any agency requesting cooperating
status must do so by August 29, 2019.
    q. Although our current intent is to prepare an environmental
assessment (EA), there is the possibility that an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) will be required. Nevertheless, this notice, associated
scoping meeting, and our scoping process will satisfy the NEPA scoping
requirements, irrespective of whether an EA or EIS is issued by the
Commission.

Scoping Meetings

    Commission staff will hold two scoping meetings in the vicinity of
the project at the times and places noted below. The daytime meeting
will focus on resource agency, Indian tribes, and non-governmental
organization concerns, while the evening meeting is primarily for
receiving input from the public. We invite all interested individuals,
organizations, and agencies to attend one or both of the meetings, and
to assist staff in identifying particular study needs, as well as the
scope of environmental issues to be addressed in the environmental
document. The times and locations of these meetings are as follows:

Evening Scoping Meeting

    Date and Time: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 at 7:00 p.m.
    Location: City of Bishop Council Chambers, 301 West Line Street,
Bishop, California 93514.
    Phone Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Daytime Scoping Meeting

    Date and Time: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 at 9:00 a.m.
    Location: City of Bishop Council Chambers, 301 West Line Street,
Bishop, California 93514.
    Phone Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    SD1, which outlines the subject areas to be addressed in the
environmental document, was mailed to the individuals and entities on
the Commission's mailing list. Copies of SD1 will be available at the
scoping meetings, or may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov,
using the ``eLibrary'' link. Follow the directions for accessing
information in paragraph n. Based on all oral and written comments, a
Scoping Document 2 (SD2) may be issued. SD2 may include a revised
process plan and schedule, as well as a list of issues, identified
through the scoping process.

Environmental Site Review

    The potential applicant and Commission staff will conduct an
Environmental Site Review of the project on Tuesday, July 30, 2019,
starting at 8:30 a.m. All participants should meet at the Eastern
Sierra College Center, located at: 4090 W. Line Street Bishop, CA
93514-7306. All participants are responsible for their own
transportation. We anticipate the environmental site review will take
all day, so participants are also advised to bring a bag lunch. Anyone
with questions about the site visit should contact Mr. Matthew Woodhall
with Southern California Edison at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Meeting Objectives

    At the scoping meetings, staff will: (1) Initiate scoping of the
issues; (2) review and discuss existing conditions and resource
management objectives; (3) review and discuss existing information and
identify preliminary information and study needs; (4) review and
discuss the process plan and schedule for pre-filing activity that
incorporates the time frames provided for in Part 5 of the Commission's
regulations and, to the extent possible, maximizes coordination of
federal, state, and tribal permitting and certification processes; and
(5) discuss the appropriateness of any federal or state agency or
Indian tribe acting as a cooperating agency for development of an
environmental document.
    Meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their issues
and/or concerns. Please review the PAD in preparation for the scoping
meetings. Directions on how to obtain a copy of the PAD and SD1 are
included in item n. of this document.

Meeting Procedures

    The meetings will be recorded by a stenographer and will be placed
in the public records of the project.

    Dated: June 27, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-14453 Filed 7-5-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 147 (Thursday, July 30, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45769-45773]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16680]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0679; Project Identifier AD-2020-01060-E;
Amendment 39-21197; AD 2020-16-13]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Corporation (Type
Certificate Previously Held by Allison Engine Company) Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain

Rolls-Royce Corporation (RRC) AE 3007A, AE 3007A1, AE 3007A1/1, AE
3007A1/2, AE 3007A1/3, AE 3007A1E, AE 3007A1P, and AE 3007A3 model
turbofan engines. This AD was prompted by an in-flight shutdown (IFSD)
of an engine and subsequent investigation by the manufacturer that
revealed a crack in the 3rd-stage compressor wheel. This AD requires
replacement of affected 3rd-stage compressor wheels. The FAA is issuing
this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective August 14, 2020.
    The FAA must receive comments on this AD by September 14, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this final rule, contact
Rolls-Royce Corporation, 450 South Meridian Street, Mail Code NB-01-06,
Indianapolis, IN 46225; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
exception occurred on : 2020-16680.htm
exception occurred on : 2020-16680.htm
royce.com">[email protected]royce.com; internet: www.rolls-royce.com. You may
view this service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products
Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington,
MA 01803. 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 https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0679; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this final rule, any comments received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kyri Zaroyiannis, Aerospace Engineer,
Chicago ACO, FAA, 2300 E Devon Ave., Des Plaines, IL 60018; phone:
(847) 294-7836; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA learned of an uncommanded IFSD of a RRC AE 3007A1 model
turbofan engine installed on an Embraer S.A. ERJ-145 airplane
conducting a revenue flight. The manufacturer's investigation of this
incident revealed that the IFSD resulted from a low-cycle fatigue crack
in the dovetail slot for the blade attachment in the 3rd-stage
compressor wheel, causing one 3rd-stage compressor blade to release.
The crack initiated in the dovetail slot due to a sharp corner in the
wheel slot geometry. The broaching process was identified as the cause
and parts from this manufacturing lot require removal from service.
This condition, if not addressed, could result in uncontained release
of the 3rd-stage compressor wheel, damage to the engine, and damage to
the airplane. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is issuing this AD because the agency evaluated all the
relevant information and determined the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same
type design.

Related Service Information

    The FAA reviewed Rolls-Royce Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) AE 3007A-
A-72-446, Revision 2, dated July 28, 2020. The ASB describes procedures
for replacing certain 3rd-stage compressor wheels.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires replacement of certain 3rd-stage compressor wheels
before they accumulate a specified number of cycles.

FAA's Justification for Immediate Adoption and Determination of the
Effective Date

    Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
U.S.C.) authorizes agencies to dispense with notice and comment
procedures for rules when the agency, for ``good cause,'' finds that
those procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest.'' Under this section, an agency, upon finding good
cause, may issue a final rule without providing notice and seeking
comment prior to issuance. Further, section 553(d) of the APA
authorizes agencies to make rules effective in less than 30 days, upon
a finding of good cause.
    An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of
this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to
adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public
justifies waiving notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule.
RRC inspected a RRC AE3007A1 model turbofan engine after it experiences
an uncommanded IFSD during a revenue flight on an Embraer ERJ-145
airplane.
    The manufacturer's inspection discovered a low-cycle fatigue crack
in a 3rd-stage compressor wheel that allowed a 3rd-stage compressor
blade to release during the flight. The manufacturer traced the cause
of the cracked 3rd-stage compressor wheel to a specific machining
process that occurred during manufacture of the 3rd-stage compressor
wheels. The manufacturer's subsequent investigation discovered multiple
3rd-stage compressor wheels in the affected serial numbered population
with similar low-cycle fatigue cracks. The 3rd-stage compressor wheels
identified in this AD are unable to remain in service beyond the cycles
since new limits listed in paragragh (g) of this AD. As a result of the
shortened compliance times established based on the FAA's risk
assessment, the FAA has determined that there is insufficient time
available to allow for notice and opportunity for prior public comment.
    The FAA considers the removal of these 3rd-stage compressor wheels
from service to be an urgent safety issue. Exceeding the reduced cycle
limits on the 3rd-stage compressor wheels required by this AD could
lead to failure of the 3rd-stage compressor wheel and high-energy
release of the 3rd-stage compressor wheel, resulting in damage to the
engine and damage to the airplane. Accordingly, notice and opportunity
for prior public comment are impracticable and contrary to public
interest pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
    In addition, the FAA finds that good cause exists pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(d) for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days,
for the same reasons the FAA found good cause to forgo notice and
comment.

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written data, views, or arguments
about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number FAA-2020-0679 and
Project Identifier AD-2020-01060-E at the beginning of your comments.
The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the final
rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include
supporting data. The FAA will consider all comments received by the
closing date and may amend this final rule because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive
verbal contact received about this final rule.

Confidential Business Information

    Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by
its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552),
CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to
this final rule contain commercial or financial information that is
customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and
that is relevant or responsive to this final rule, it is important that
you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each
page of your submission containing CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will
treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they
will not be placed in the public docket of this final rule. Submissions
containing CBI should be sent to Kyri Zaroyiannis, Aerospace Engineer,
Chicago ACO, FAA, 2300 E. Devon Ave., Des Plaines, IL 60018. Any
commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated
as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) do not
apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt
a rule without prior notice and comment. Because the FAA has determined
that it has good cause to adopt this rule without notice and comment,
RFA analysis is not required.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimate that this AD affects 4 engines installed on
airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remove 3rd-stage compressor wheel.....  40 work-hours x $85 per               $0          $3,400         $13,600
                                         hour = $3,400.
Replace 3rd-stage compressor wheel....  85 work-hours x $85 per           32,844          40,069         160,276
                                         hour = $7,225.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs''
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2020-16-13 Rolls-Royce Corporation (Type Certificate previously held
by Allison Engine Company): Amendment 39-21197; Docket No. FAA-2020-
0679; Project Identifier AD-2020-01060-E.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective August 14, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Rolls-Royce Corporation (RRC) AE 3007A, AE
3007A1, AE 3007A1/1, AE 3007A1/2, AE 3007A1/3, AE 3007A1E, AE
3007A1P, and AE 3007A3 model turbofan engines with a 3rd-stage
compressor wheel, part number (P/N) 23084158, and with a serial
number listed in Figure 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR30JY20.023

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7230, Turbine Engine
Compressor Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by an in-flight shutdown of an engine
during a revenue flight and subsequent investigation by the
manufacturer that revealed a crack in the 3rd-stage compressor
wheel. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent failure of the 3rd-
stage compressor wheel. The unsafe condition, if not addressed,
could result in an uncontained release of the 3rd-stage compressor
wheel, damage to the engine, and damage to the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    (1) For AE 3007A, AE 3007A1, AE 3007A1/1, AE 3007A1/2, AE
3007A1/3, AE 3007A1P, and AE 3007A3 model turbofan engines, prior to
the 3rd-stage compressor wheel accumulating the cycles listed in
Table 1 to paragraph (g)(1) of this AD or before further flight,
whichever occurs later after the effective date of this AD, remove
the affected 3rd-stage compressor wheel and replace with a part
eligible for installation.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR30JY20.024

    (2) For AE 3007A1E model turbofan engines, prior to the 3rd-
stage compressor wheel accumulating the cycles listed in Table 2 to
paragraph (g)(2) of this AD or before further flight, whichever
occurs later after the effective date of this AD, remove the
affected 3rd-stage compressor wheel and replace with a part eligible
for installation.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR30JY20.025

(h) Definitions

    (1) For the purpose of this AD, a part eligible for installation
is a 3rd-stage compressor wheel that does not have a P/N and a
serial number listed in the Applicability, paragraph (c) of this AD.
    (2) For the purpose of this AD, an ``engine shop visit'' is the
induction of an engine into the shop for maintenance involving the
separation of pairs of major mating engine flanges, except that the
separation of engine flanges solely for the purposes of
transportation of the engine without subsequent engine maintenance
does not constitute an engine shop visit.

(i) Special Flight Permit

    (1) Special flight permits, as described in Section 21.197 and
Section 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197
and 21.199), are subject to the requirements of paragraph (i)(1)(i)
of this AD.
    (i) Operators may perform a one-time non-revenue ferry flight to
a location where the engine can be removed from service. This ferry
flight must be performed with only essential flight crew.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (2) [Reserved]

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Chicago ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the
certification office, send it to the attention of the person
identified in paragraph (k) of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Kyri Zaroyiannis,
Aerospace Engineer, Chicago ACO, FAA, 2300 E Devon Ave., Des
Plaines, IL 60018; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued on July 28, 2020.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-16680 Filed 7-28-20; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 235 (Tuesday, December 8, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 76230-76232]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30831]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0689; FRL-9936-83-Region 9]

Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Placer County Air
Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to approve a revision to the Placer County Air Pollution
Control District (PCAPCD) portion of the California SIP. We are
approving a local emergency episode plan that describes actions that
PCAPCD will take to prevent dangerously high ambient emission levels
under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on February 8, 2016 without further
notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comments by January 7, 2016. If
we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2015-0689, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or
withdrawn. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. If you need to include CBI as part
of your comment, please visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html
for further instructions. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.)
must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and should include discussion of all
points you wish to make. For the full EPA public comment policy and
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.
    Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105-3901.
While all documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov,
some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy
location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be
publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard
copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vanessa Graham, EPA Region IX, (415)
947-4120<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What plan did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this plan?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted plan?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the plan?
    B. Does the plan meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. EPA Recommendations To Further Improve the Plan
    D. Public Comment and Final Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What plan did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the plan addressed by this action with the date that
it was adopted by the PCAPCD and submitted by California Air Resources
Board (ARB).

                                             Table 1--Submitted Plan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Local agency                  Plan title                  Adopted                    Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCAPCD.........................  Ozone Emergency Episode  June 11, 2015.............  July 15, 2015.
                                  Plan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 11, 2015, the EPA determined that the submittal for the
PCAPCD Ozone Emergency Episode Plan met the completeness criteria in 40
CFR part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this plan?

    There are no previous versions of this plan adopted by PCAPCD or
approved by EPA in the SIP.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted plan?

    The CAA requires the EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone and five other pollutants that are harmful
to public health and the environment. Each state is required to submit
to the EPA, within three years after the promulgation of a primary or
secondary NAAQS, or any revision thereof, an infrastructure SIP
revision that provides for the implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of such NAAQS. CAA Sec.  110(a)(2) describes the contents
required of such a plan that constitute the ``infrastructure'' of a
state's air quality management program. The PCAPCD Ozone Emergency
Episode Plan is intended to fulfill the CAA Sec.  110(a)(2)(G)
infrastructure SIP requirement for states to submit an air pollution
emergency contingency plan as required by 40 CFR part 51, subpart H.

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?

    SIPs must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2)) and SIP
revisions are restricted in how they can relax approved SIPs. This plan
must also meet the infrastructure SIP requirements found in 40 CFR part
51, subpart H (51.150 through 51.153).
    Guidance that we used to evaluate section 110(a)(2) CAA
requirements includes: ``Guidance Document for Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan'' Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2), EPA (September 2013).

B. Does the plan meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe this plan is consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability, SIP relaxations and infrastructure
SIPs. The EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information
about this plan and our evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Final Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is fully
approving the submitted plan because we believe it fulfills all
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted plan. If we
receive adverse comments by January 7, 2016, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on February 8, 2016. This will incorporate the
rule into the federally enforceable SIP.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the
PCAPCD rule described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
available electronically through www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section of this
preamble for more information).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);

     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 8, 2016. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final
rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the Proposed
Rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an
immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so
that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in
the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: October 26, 2015.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

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

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(465) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (465) New regulation for the following APCD was submitted on July
15, 2015 by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Placer County Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) ``Ozone Emergency Episode Plan,'' adopted on June 11, 2015.

[FR Doc. 2015-30831 Filed 12-7-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 233 (Monday, December 5, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 87553]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29098]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC17-40-000.
    Applicants: Heartland Energy Group, Inc., Interstate Power and
Light Company.
    Description: Application of Interstate Power and Light Company, et
al. for transaction approval pursuant to Federal Power Act Section 203.
    Filed Date: 11/29/16.
    Accession Number: 20161129-5236.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/20/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2254-003.
    Applicants: Scrubgrass Generating Company, L.P.
    Description: Compliance filing: Informational Filing to be
effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 11/29/16.
    Accession Number: 20161129-5103.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1213-001.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance effective date notice of
BTM-NG tariff revisions to be effective 12/13/2016.
    Filed Date: 11/29/16.
    Accession Number: 20161129-5213.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1738-001.
    Applicants: Beacon Solar 4, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Beacon Solar 4, LLC MBR Tariff to
be effective 7/18/2016.
    Filed Date: 11/29/16.
    Accession Number: 20161129-5151.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2010-001.
    Applicants: Hancock Wind, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Hancock
Wind, LLC.
    Filed Date: 11/28/16.
    Accession Number: 20161128-5275.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/19/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-366-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amended Filing-Revisions to
Prospectively Require All VERs to Register as DVERs to be effective 1/
15/2017.
    Filed Date: 11/29/16.
    Accession Number: 20161129-5142.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-420-000.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2016-11-28 553, 554, & 565-
NSP NOC Filing to be effective 11/29/2016.
    Filed Date: 11/28/16.
    Accession Number: 20161128-5223.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/19/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-421-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of PPA
between PNM and Jicarilla Apache Nation to be effective 11/30/2016.
    Filed Date: 11/29/16.
    Accession Number: 20161129-5152.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-422-000.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2016-11-29 CapX Brookings
Filing to be effective 4/16/2016.
    Filed Date: 11/29/16.
    Accession Number: 20161129-5192.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-423-000.
    Applicants: Rubicon NYP Corp.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: RubiconNYPinitialMBR to be
effective 1/30/2017.
    Filed Date: 11/29/16.
    Accession Number: 20161129-5207.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-424-000.
    Applicants: Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market Based
Rate to be effective 11/30/2016.
    Filed Date: 11/29/16.
    Accession Number: 20161129-5252.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-425-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: DSA SunSelect Produce
(California), Inc. Project SA No. 918 to be effective 1/29/2017.
    Filed Date: 11/29/16.
    Accession Number: 20161129-5253.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/20/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-426-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Missouri River Energy
Services Member Formula Rate (Denison) to be effective 2/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 11/29/16.
    Accession Number: 20161129-5263.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/20/16.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
reliability filings:

    Docket Numbers: RD17-2-000.
    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corporation.
    Description: Petition of the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation for Approval of Interpretation of Reliability Standard CIP-
002-5.1a.
    Filed Date: 11/28/16.
    Accession Number: 20161128-5254.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/20/16.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 29, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-29098 Filed 12-2-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 214 (Friday, November 5, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 68347]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28027]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings No. 1

October 28, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1434-000.
    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline LP.
    Description: Alliance Pipeline LP submits tariff filing per
154.204: Nov March Auction to be effective 11/1/2010.
    Filed Date: 10/27/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101027-5054.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, November 08, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1435-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gulf Transmission Company.
    Description: Columbia Gulf Transmission Company submits tariff
filing per 154.312: Rate Case--Case-In-Chief to be effective 12/1/2010.
    Filed Date: 10/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101028-5026.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, November 09, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1436-000.
    Applicants: Great Lakes Gas Transmission Limited Partnership.
    Description: Great Lakes Gas Transmission Limited Partnership
submits tariff filing per 154.601: Section 8--Negotiated Rates to be
effective 11/1/2010.
    Filed Date: 10/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101028-5039.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, November 09, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1437-000.
    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC submits tariff filing per
154.204: Negotiated Rate 2010-10-28 Enserco, Concord to be effective
11/1/2010.
    Filed Date: 10/28/2010.
    Accession Number: 20101028-5047.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, November 09, 2010.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings 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) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. 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. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    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
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings 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 e-mail 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>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-28027 Filed 11-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 207 (Wednesday, October 26, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 74360-74362]
[FR Doc No: 2016-25664]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9299; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-119-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Bombardier Inc. Model DHC-8-102, -103, and -106 airplanes; DHC-
8-200 series airplanes; and Model DHC-8-300 series airplanes. This
proposed AD was prompted by reports of incorrect installation of the
auto-ignition system due to crossed wires at one of the splices in the
auto-relight system. This proposed AD would require inspecting the
auto-ignition system for correct wiring, and doing corrective actions
if necessary. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct incorrect
wiring of the auto-ignition system, which could result in inability to
restart the engine in flight and consequent reduced controllability of
the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 12,
2016.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact
Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard,
Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 416-375-
4539; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this referenced service information at
the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. 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 by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9299; 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 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: Morton Lee, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion and Services Branch, ANE-173, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
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-2016-9299;
Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-119-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 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 (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2013-36, dated November 19, 2013 (referred to after this as the
Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for certain Bombardier Inc. Model DHC-8-
102, -103, and -106 airplanes; DHC-8-200 series airplanes; and Model
DHC-8-300 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    There have been reports of incorrect installation of the auto-
ignition system introduced by MS [ModSum] 8Q100813 of SB 8-74-02,
where wires crossed at one of the splices in the auto-relight
system. The incorrect wire installation may result in the inability
to achieve an in-flight engine relight when the ignition switch is
selected in the AUTO position.
    Bombardier has issued SB 8-74-05 to introduce an inspection to
check for correct wiring connection and rectification as required.
This [Canadian] AD mandates incorporation of Bombardier SB 8-74-05.

    Corrective actions include reconnecting any incorrect wiring of the
auto-ignition system and performing a functional test. You may examine
the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9299.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Bombardier Service Bulletin 8-74-05, Revision B, dated
April 14, 2014. This service information describes procedures for
inspecting the auto-ignition system for correct wiring, and doing
corrective actions that include rewiring if needed, followed by a
functional test of the auto-ignition system. This service information
is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to
it through their normal course of business or by the means identified
in the ADDRESSES section.

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.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 88 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
               Action                        Labor cost           Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection..........................  1 work-hour x $85 per                $0              $85           $7,480
                                       hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, we estimate that any necessary corrective actions
would take about 2 work-hours, for a cost of $170 per product. We have
no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these
actions.

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);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2016-9299; Directorate Identifier
2016-NM-119-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by December 12, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. airplanes identified in
paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of this AD, certificated in

any category, serial numbers 003 through 672 inclusive, on which
Bombardier ModSum 8Q100813 or Bombardier Service Bulletin 8-74-02 is
incorporated.
    (1) Model DHC-8-102, -103, and -106 airplanes.
    (2) Model DHC-8-201 and -202 airplanes.
    (3) Model DHC-8-301, -311, and -315 airplanes.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 74, Ignition.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of incorrect installation of the
auto-ignition system due to crossed wires at one of the splices in
the auto-relight system. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct incorrect wiring of the auto-ignition system, which could
result in inability to restart the engine in flight and consequent
reduced controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection and Corrective Actions

    Within 2,000 flight hours or 12 months after the effective date
of this AD, whichever occurs first: Inspect the auto-ignition system
for correct wiring and do all applicable corrective actions, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier
Service Bulletin 8-74-05, Revision B, dated April 14, 2014. All
applicable corrective actions must be done before further flight.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Bombardier Service Bulletin 8-74-05,
dated July 12, 2013; or Revision A, dated January 27, 2014.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO, ANE-170, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate.
If sending information directly to the ACO, send it to ATTN: Program
Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600
Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-
7300; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your
appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO,
ANE-170, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier, Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2013-36, dated November
19, 2013, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-9299.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt
Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this service information at
the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 14, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-25664 Filed 10-25-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 5, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14241-14245]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04933]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 372

[EPA-HQ-TRI-2006-0319; FRL-9787-1]
RIN 2025-AA19

Acetonitrile; Community Right-to-Know Toxic Chemical Release
Reporting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Denial of petition.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is denying a petition to remove acetonitrile from the list
of chemicals subject to reporting requirements under section 313 of the
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA) and
section 6607 of the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 (PPA). EPA has
reviewed the available data on this chemical and has determined that
acetonitrile does not meet the deletion criterion of EPCRA section
313(d)(3). Specifically, EPA is denying this petition because EPA's
review of the petition and available information resulted in the
conclusion that acetonitrile meets the listing criterion of EPCRA
section 313(d)(2)(B) due to its potential to cause death in humans.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel R. Bushman, Environmental
Analysis Division, Office of Information Analysis and Access (2842T),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: 202-
566-0677; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for specific information on
this notice. For general information on EPCRA section 313, contact the
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Hotline, toll free at
(800) 424-9346 or<PHONE_NUMBER> in Virginia and Alaska or toll free,
TDD<PHONE_NUMBER>, http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hotline/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this notice apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture,
process, or otherwise use acetonitrile. Potentially affected categories
and entities may include, but are not limited to:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Examples of potentially
                 Category                        affected entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.................................  Facilities included in the
                                            following NAICS
                                            manufacturing codes
                                            (corresponding to SIC codes
                                            20 through 39): 311*, 312*,
                                            313*, 314*, 315*, 316, 321,
                                            322, 323*, 324, 325*, 326*,
                                            327, 331, 332, 333, 334*,
                                            335*, 336, 337*, 339*,
                                            111998*, 211112*, 212324*,
                                            212325*, 212393*, 212399*,
                                            488390*, 511110, 511120,
                                            511130, 511140*, 511191,
                                            511199, 512220, 512230*,
                                            519130*, 541712*, or
                                            811490*.
                                           *Exceptions and/or
                                            limitations exist for these
                                            NAICS codes.

                                           Facilities included in the
                                            following NAICS codes
                                            (corresponding to SIC codes
                                            other than SIC codes 20
                                            through 39): 212111, 212112,
                                            212113 (correspond to SIC
                                            12, Coal Mining (except
                                            1241)); or 212221, 212222,
                                            212231, 212234, 212299
                                            (correspond to SIC 10, Metal
                                            Mining (except 1011, 1081,
                                            and 1094)); or 221111,
                                            221112, 221113, 221119,
                                            221121, 221122, 221330
                                            (Limited to facilities that
                                            combust coal and/or oil for
                                            the purpose of generating
                                            power for distribution in
                                            commerce) (correspond to SIC
                                            4911, 4931, and 4939,
                                            Electric Utilities); or
                                            424690, 425110, 425120
                                            (Limited to facilities
                                            previously classified in SIC
                                            5169, Chemicals and Allied
                                            Products, Not Elsewhere
                                            Classified); or 424710
                                            (corresponds to SIC 5171,
                                            Petroleum Bulk Terminals and
                                            Plants); or 562112 (Limited
                                            to facilities primarily
                                            engaged in solvent recovery
                                            services on a contract or
                                            fee basis (previously
                                            classified under SIC 7389,
                                            Business Services, NEC)); or
                                            562211, 562212, 562213,
                                            562219, 562920 (Limited to
                                            facilities regulated under
                                            the Resource Conservation
                                            and Recovery Act, subtitle
                                            C, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.)
                                            (correspond to SIC 4953,
                                            Refuse Systems).
Federal Government.......................  Federal facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Some of the entities listed in the table have exemptions and/or
limitations regarding coverage, and other types of entities not listed
in the table could also be affected. To determine whether your facility
would be affected by this action, you should carefully examine the
applicability criteria in part 372 subpart B of Title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. If you have questions regarding the applicability
of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-TRI-2006-0319. All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the OEI Docket, EPA/DC, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. This
Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OEI
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. Introduction

A. Statutory Authority

    This action is taken under sections 313(d) and 313(e)(1) of EPCRA,
42 U.S.C. 11023. EPCRA is also referred to as Title III of the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) (Pub. L.
99-499).

B. Background

    Section 313 of EPCRA, 42 U.S.C. 11023, requires certain facilities
that manufacture, process, or otherwise use listed toxic chemicals in
amounts above reporting threshold levels to report their environmental
releases and other waste management quantities of such chemicals
annually. These facilities must also report pollution prevention and
recycling data for such chemicals, pursuant to section 6607 of the PPA,
42 U.S.C. 13106. Congress established an initial list of toxic
chemicals subject to reporting that comprised more than 300 chemicals
and 20 chemical categories.
    EPCRA section 313(d) authorizes EPA to add or delete chemicals from
the list and sets criteria for these actions. EPCRA section 313(d)(2)
states that EPA may add a chemical to the list if any of the listing
criteria in Section 313(d)(2) are met. Therefore, to add a chemical,
EPA must demonstrate that at least one criterion is met, but need not
determine whether any other criterion is met. Conversely, to remove a
chemical from the list, EPCRA section 313(d)(3) dictates that EPA must
demonstrate that none of the listing criteria in Section 313(d)(2) are
met. The EPCRA section 313(d)(2) criteria are:
    (A) The chemical is known to cause or can reasonably be anticipated
to cause significant adverse acute human health effects at
concentration levels that are reasonably likely to exist beyond
facility site boundaries as a result of continuous, or frequently
recurring, releases.
    (B) The chemical is known to cause or can reasonably be anticipated
to cause in humans--
    (i) cancer or teratogenic effects, or
    (ii) serious or irreversible-
    (I) reproductive dysfunctions,
    (II) neurological disorders,
    (III) heritable genetic mutations, or
    (IV) other chronic health effects.
    (C) The chemical is known to cause or can be reasonably anticipated
to cause, because of
    (i) its toxicity,
    (ii) its toxicity and persistence in the environment, or
    (iii) its toxicity and tendency to bioaccumulate in the
environment, a significant adverse effect on the environment of
sufficient seriousness, in the judgment of the Administrator, to
warrant reporting under this section.
    EPA often refers to the section 313(d)(2)(A) criterion as the
``acute human health effects criterion;'' the section 313(d)(2)(B)
criterion as the ``chronic human health effects criterion;'' and the
section 313(d)(2)(C) criterion as the ``environmental effects
criterion.''
    EPA issued a statement of petition policy and guidance in the
Federal Register of February 4, 1987 (52 FR 3479) to provide guidance
regarding the recommended content and format for submitting petitions.
On May 23, 1991 (56 FR 23703), EPA issued guidance regarding the
recommended content of petitions to delete individual members of the
section 313 metal compounds categories. EPA has also published in the
Federal Register of November 30, 1994 (59 FR 61432) a statement
clarifying its interpretation of the section 313(d)(2) and (d)(3)
criteria for modifying the section 313 list of toxic chemicals.

III. What is the description of the petition and the regulatory status
of acetonitrile?

    Acetonitrile is on the list of toxic chemicals subject to the
annual release reporting requirements of EPCRA section 313 and PPA
section 6607. Acetonitrile was among the list of chemicals placed on
the EPCRA section 313 list by Congress. Acetonitrile is listed under
the Clean Air Act (CAA) as a volatile organic compound (VOC) and a
hazardous air pollutant (HAP). Acetonitrile is also on the list of
hazardous constituents (Appendix VIII to Part 261) and can qualify as
listed

hazardous waste (U003) under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA).
    On February 4, 1998, EPA received a petition from BP Chemicals Inc.
(BP) and GNI Chemicals Corporation (GNICC) to delete acetonitrile from
the list of chemicals reportable under EPCRA section 313 and PPA
section 6607, stating that acetonitrile meets all of the criteria for
delisting under EPCRA section 313(d)(3). On March 5, 1999 (64 FR
10597), EPA denied the petition based on a determination that
acetonitrile meets the listing criteria of EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B)
and (d)(2)(C) due to its potential to cause neurotoxicity and death in
humans and its contribution to the formation of ozone in the
environment.
    In September 2000, based on additional reviews, EPA reversed its
previous position that acetonitrile was a chronic neurotoxicant (Ref.
1).
    On June 28, 2002, EPA received a second petition from BP to delete
acetonitrile from the list of chemicals reportable under EPCRA section
313. Specifically, BP argues that acetonitrile meets all of the
criteria for delisting under EPCRA section 313(d)(3) because: (1) Under
generally accepted scientific principles, chronic mortality is not an
issue for concern; and (2) EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards (OAQPS) has concluded that acetonitrile does not have
sufficient photochemical reactivity to contribute to ozone formation.
Subsequent to BP's filing of the petition on June 28, 2002, BP formed
Innovene USA LLC as its olefin, derivatives and refining group, which
was then acquired from BP by INEOS USA, LLC (INEOS), which has taken
over the petition.

IV. What is EPA's technical review of acetonitrile?

    In response to the petition to delete acetonitrile from the list of
chemicals reportable under EPCRA section 313 and PPA section 6607, EPA
prepared a Technical Review of Acetonitrile (Methyl Cyanide) (Ref. 2).
The sections below summarize the human health hazard information
contained in the Technical Review. The review did not consider
acetonitrile's status as a volatile organic compound (VOC) and thus its
contribution to the formation of ozone in the environment since EPA no
longer considers these factors as a basis for listing under EPCRA
section 313(d)(2) (70 FR 37698).

A. Metabolism

    Acetonitrile is metabolized to inorganic cyanide through the
intermediate production of hydrogen cyanide. Data demonstrate that the
metabolism to cyanide is oxygen- and NADPH-dependent (Ref. 3), and
mediated by cytochrome P450 isozyme 2E1 (or P-450j) production of a
reactive intermediate, methyl cyanohydrine (Refs. 4, 5, and 6).
Formaldehyde and formic acid are also by-products of acetonitrile
metabolism (Ref. 4). Cyanide is further oxidized and conjugated to
thiocyanate, a less toxic compound that is excreted in urine, but one
that has been shown to interfere with thyroid function (Ref. 7).

B. Toxicity Evaluation

1. Effects of Acute Exposure
    Humans acutely exposed to sublethal doses of acetonitrile developed
effects that are generally attributed to metabolism of acetonitrile to
cyanide (Ref. 8). Several cases were reported in which children or
adults ingested large amounts of acetonitrile ([ap]250 to 4,000
milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg)) (Ref. 9). Symptoms exhibited by poisoning
victims include anxiety, confusion, hyperpnea, dyspnea, rapid pulse,
unconsciousness, and convulsions (Ref. 9). Cyanide was detected in the
blood of these individuals. Case reports of acute occupational exposure
to acetonitrile indicate that workers exhibited nausea, shallow and/or
irregular respiration, and impaired motor activity. An autopsy of a
worker who died shortly after exposure revealed cerebral, thyroid,
liver, splenic, and renal congestion (Ref. 9). Gastric erosion has been
reported in individuals who ingested acetonitrile (Refs. 10 and 11).
    In animals, oral LD50 values (i.e., the dose of a
chemical that is lethal to 50 percent of the test organisms) have been
reported for the mouse (269-453 mg/kg) and the rat (1,730-4,050 mg/kg)
and inhalation LC50 values (i.e., the concentration of a
chemical that is lethal to 50 percent of the test organisms) of 12,000,
16,000, and 7,551-12,435 parts per million (ppm) have been reported for
the rat for 2, 4, and 8 hour exposures, respectively, and for the mouse
following 1-2 hour exposures (2,300-5,700 ppm) (Ref. 9). A 1-hour
LC50 estimate for acetonitrile in mice was reported to be
2,693 ppm (Ref. 6). A recent study (Ref. 12) reported a slightly higher
oral LD50 of 617 mg/kg for Crl:CD-1(ICR)BR mice and an
inhalation LC50 of 3,587 ppm for this strain. Observational
signs of toxicity reported in animals after acute exposure to
acetonitrile include dyspnea, tachypnea, tremors, and convulsions in
various studies (Ref. 9).
2. Effects of Subchronic and Chronic Exposure
    Subchronic inhalation exposure to acetonitrile resulted in an
increase in mortality in rats at 1,600 ppm (calculates to approximately
505 mg/kg-day) and in mice at 800 ppm (calculates to approximately 402
mg/kg-day) (Ref. 13).
    Following subchronic inhalation exposure in rats, the mortality
incidence was 0/20 in each of the 0, 100, 200 and 400 ppm groups, 1/20
in the 800 ppm group (one death occurring on day 5), and 9/20 in the
1,600 ppm group (four deaths occurring on day 2, one each on days 7, 9,
10, 11, and 23) (Ref. 13). Clinical signs at the two high-concentration
groups included hypoactivity and ruffled fur during the first week.
Ataxia, abnormal posture, and clonic convulsions occurred in the 1,600
ppm males that died. In addition, a decrease in hematocrit, hemoglobin,
and erythrocytes was observed in male rats at 1,600 ppm and in female
rats at >=800 ppm. Changes in organ weights were also observed,
primarily at the highest dose in male rats and at >=800 ppm in female
rats, and include decreases in absolute and relative thymus weight,
increases in absolute and/or relative liver and kidney weight, and
decreases and increases in brain and heart weight, respectively.
Histopathologic effects were limited to rats that died at 800 and 1,600
ppm; effects observed include congestion, edema, and hemorrhage in the
lung alveoli.
    Following subchronic inhalation exposure in mice, the mortality
incidence was 0/20 in each of the 0, 100 and 200 ppm groups, 1/20 in
the 400 ppm group (death occurring on day 13), 5/20 in the 800 ppm
group (deaths occurring on days 20, 21, 45, 69, 89) and 20/20 in the
1,600 ppm group (all deaths occurring by day 21) (Ref. 13). Changes in
organ weights were observed, including increased absolute and/or
relative liver weight at >=100 ppm in males and >=400 ppm in females
and increased relative lung weight at >=200 ppm in males.
    Effects were not observed in rats or mice following chronic
inhalation exposure to 400 ppm (calculates to approximately 126 mg/kg-
day) acetonitrile in rats and 200 ppm (calculates to approximately 100
mg/kg-day) acetonitrile in mice (Ref. 13). The concentrations at which
effects were observed in the 13-week study were not tested in the
chronic study, and, in addition, two of the three principal reviewers
of the study suggested that the highest exposure concentrations applied

in the chronic study (200 ppm-mouse; 400 ppm-rat) were too low and one
reviewer suggested concentrations should have been as high as 800 ppm
(Ref. 13).
3. Carcinogenicity
    There are no studies evaluating the carcinogenicity of acetonitrile
in humans. Other data pertinent to the assessment of potential
carcinogenicity include a National Toxicology Program (NTP) cancer
bioassay in mice and rats. NTP concluded that the evidence for
carcinogenicity via inhalation of acetonitrile in male F344/N rats was
equivocal (Ref. 13). Although there was a statistically significant
positive trend in the incidences of hepatocellular adenomas,
carcinomas, and adenomas and carcinomas (combined) in male rats only,
the incidences were not statistically significant by pairwise
comparison or by life table analysis. There was no evidence of
carcinogenicity in female rats or in either male or female B6C3F1 mice
(Ref. 13).
4. Developmental and Reproductive Toxicity
    Following acute inhalation exposure to 3,800 ppm acetonitrile to
hamsters on a single day during gestation day 8 (GD8), an increase in
maternal toxicity and mortality was observed; at higher exposure
concentrations (>=5,000 ppm), an increase in severe fetal
abnormalities, including exencephaly, encephalocoele, and rib fusions
was reported (Ref. 14). Following acute oral ingestion of acetonitrile
in hamsters on a single day at GD8, a decrease in fetal body weight was
observed at the lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) of 100 mg/
kg (the LOAEL for maternal toxicity was 300 mg/kg) (Ref. 14). In rats,
a single oral dose of 2,000 mg/kg on GD10 resulted in dysmorphogenic
features, including misdirected allantois and/or trunk and caudal
extremity (Ref. 15). Mortality was not observed in dams exposed to
2,000 mg/kg acetonitrile on GD10; however, dams exhibited clinical
signs of toxicity including piloerection, prostration, and/or tremors,
and caused unspecified maternal weight loss between GDs 10 and 12 (Ref.
15). In a oral gavage study, New Zealand white rabbits were
administered acetonitrile on GDs 6-18, which resulted in a decrease in
the average number of live fetuses per litter at 30 mg/kg-day, as well
as an increase in maternal mortality and anorexia, ataxia, decreased
motor activity, bradypnea, dyspnea, and impaired righting reflex (Ref.
16).
    Inhalation and oral exposure in rats and rabbits resulted in both
maternal and developmental toxicity. Maternal mortality was observed in
rats at inhalation concentrations of 1,827 ppm (Ref. 17) and oral doses
of 275 mg/kg-day (Ref. 18), and at 30 mg/kg-day in rabbits (Ref. 16).
In rats, inhalation exposure to 1,827 ppm resulted in an increase in
the percentage of nonlive implants per litter and early resorptions
(Ref. 17). In rats, there was an increase in post-implantation loss and
in the number of fetuses with unossified sternebrae and a decrease in
number of live fetuses per dam at the oral dose of 275 mg/kg-day (Ref.
18). A decrease in the average number of live fetuses per litter was
observed in rabbits at 30 mg/kg-day (Ref. 16). While developmental
toxicity was observed at doses that produced maternal toxicity or
mortality, it is inadequate to assume that the developmental effects
result only from maternal toxicity, and the results may indicate that
both lifestages, the adult and developing offspring, are sensitive to
the dose level (Ref. 19).

V. What is EPA's summary of the technical review?

    Based on the available data, and given the severity of the effect,
mortality, EPA concludes that there is sufficient evidence to support a
concern for moderately high toxicity from exposure to acetonitrile. In
assessing mortality following acetonitrile exposure, the patterns in
the timing of death across exposures demonstrates the chronic nature of
the effect. Mortality was observed in the 13-week mouse inhalation
study in the 800 and 1600 ppm treatment groups (Ref. 13). The first
occurrence of mortality in the 800 ppm treatment group was not observed
until day 20 and single deaths continued on days 21, 45, 69 and 89 of
the 13-week study. This pattern of mortality is dissimilar to that
observed in the 13-week mouse inhalation study at 1,600 ppm, where
initial deaths were observed in the first week and all mice died by day
21 (Ref. 13).
    Based on the observed pattern of death in the 800 ppm treatment
group of the NTP 13-week mouse inhalation study, beginning at the end
of the third week and extending through the termination of the study,
it can be reasonably anticipated that additional acetonitrile-induced
mortality would have continued beyond the termination of the study and
the sacrifice of surviving animals. Because the mortalities extended
from the third week of the study to study termination, the data
indicates that the mortality observed in the 800 ppm treatment group is
not due to a single acute exposure to sufficiently high acetonitrile
concentrations, but rather is best explained as being the result of
long-term repeated exposures. The observed exposure-response
relationship for acetonitrile demonstrates that a threshold exists at
which acetonitrile exposure levels are sufficient to cause mortality
from chronic exposure, and, as such, mortality would not necessarily be
expected following chronic exposure at the doses tested in the NTP 2-
year study because the acetonitrile exposure levels in the study design
were not sufficient to cause mortality.
    In addition, in 1999, EPA's Integrated Risk Information System
(IRIS) Toxicological Review of Acetonitrile (Ref. 8) set the reference
concentration (RfC) for acetonitrile based on this same 13-week mouse
inhalation study (Ref. 13). The IRIS Toxicological Review of
Acetonitrile identified the 400 ppm concentration in the NTP (1996)
mouse study as a frank effect level (FEL) and the critical effect in
the derivation of the reference concentration (RfC), given the death of
a mouse at week 2 at 400 ppm and the increased mortality at 800 ppm.
The FEL is a level of exposure or dose that produces irreversible,
adverse effects at a statistically or biologically significant increase
in frequency or severity between those exposed and those not exposed.
The RfC is an estimate of a continuous inhalation exposure to the human
population (including sensitive subgroups) that is likely to be without
an appreciable risk of deleterious effects during a lifetime. Such a
``lifetime'' exposure value, set by IRIS based on the 13-week mouse
inhalation study, is based on chronic effects, and would be unnecessary
if IRIS found only acute effects.

VI. What is EPA's rationale for the denial?

    EPA is denying the petition to delete acetonitrile from the EPCRA
section 313 list of toxic chemicals. This denial is based on EPA's
conclusion that acetonitrile can reasonably be anticipated to cause
serious or irreversible chronic health effects in humans. Based on the
available data, and given the severity of the effect, mortality, EPA
concludes that there is sufficient evidence to support a concern for
moderately high toxicity from chronic exposure to acetonitrile.
    Because EPA believes that acetonitrile has moderately high chronic
toxicity, EPA does not believe that an exposure assessment is
appropriate for determining whether acetonitrile meets the criteria of
EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B). This determination is

consistent with EPA's published statement clarifying its interpretation
of the section 313(d)(2) and (d)(3) criteria for modifying the section
313 list of toxic chemicals (59 FR 61432, November 30, 1994).

VII. References

    EPA has established an official public docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-TRI-2006-0319. The public docket includes
information considered by EPA in developing this action, including the
documents listed below, which are electronically or physically located
in the docket. In addition, interested parties should consult documents
that are referenced in the documents that EPA has placed in the docket,
regardless of whether these referenced documents are electronically or
physically located in the docket. For assistance in locating documents
that are referenced in documents that EPA has placed in the docket, but
that are not electronically or physically located in the docket, please
consult the person listed in the above FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
1. U.S. EPA. 2000. OPPT/RAD Decision on Neurotoxicity Endpoint for
Acetonitrile. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Washington,
DC.
2. U.S. EPA, 2012. Technical Review of Acetonitrile (Methyl Cyanide).
Office of Environmental Information. Washington, DC. November 5, 2012.
3. Freeman, J.J. and E.P. Hayes. 1988. Microsomal metabolism of
acetonitrile to cyanide. Biochem. Pharmacol. 37:1153-1159.
4. Ahmed, A.E., J.P. Loh, B. Ghanayem et al. 1992. Studies on the
mechanism of acetonitrile toxicity: I. Whole body autoradiographic
distribution and macromolecular interaction of 214C-acetonitrile in
mice. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 70:322-330.
5. Feierman, D.E. and A.I. Cederbaum. 1989. Role of cytochrome P-450
IIE1 and catalase in the oxidation of acetonitrile to cyanide. Chem.
Res. Toxicol. 2:359-66.
6. Willhite, C.C. and R.P. Smith. 1981. The role of cyanide liberation
in the acute toxicity of aliphatic nitriles. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.
59:559-602.
7. Hartung, R. 1982. Cyanides and nitriles. In: Patty's Industrial
Hygiene and Toxicology, 3rd Rev. Ed. Patty, F.A., G.D. Clayton, F.E.
Clayton et al., eds. New York: Wiley. pp. 4845-4900.
8. U.S. EPA. 1999. Toxicological Review of Acetonitrile. Office of
Research and Development. Washington, DC. January, 1999. Available at
http://www.epa.gov/iris/toxreviews/0205-tr.pdf.
9. WHO (World Health Organization). 1993. Environmental Health Criteria
154: Acetonitrile. International Programme on Chemical Safety, Geneva,
Switzerland. Available at http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc154.htm.
10. Ballantyne, B. 1983. Artifacts in the definition of toxicity by
cyanides and cyanogens. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 3:400-408.
11. Way, J.L. 1981. Pharmacologic aspects of cyanide and its
antagonism. In: Cyanide in Biology. Vennesland, B., E.E. Conn, C.J.
Knowles et al., eds. New York, NY: Academic Press. pp. 29-49.
12. Moore, N.P., R.J. Hilaaski, T.D. Morris et al. 2000. Acute and
subacute toxicological evaluation of acetonitrile. Int. J. Toxicol.
19:363-364.
13. NTP (National Toxicology Program). 1996. Toxicology and
carcinogenesis studies of acetonitrile (CAS NO. 75-05-8) in F344/N rats
and B6C3F1 mice (inhalation studies). NTP Technical Report Series 447.
14. Willhite, C.C. 1983. Developmental toxicology of acetonitrile in
the Syrian golden hamster. Teratology. 27:313-325.
15. Saillenfait, A.M. and J.P. Sabat[eacute]. 2000. Comparative
developmental toxicities of aliphatic nitriles: In vivo and in vitro
observations. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 163:149-163.
16. Argus Research Laboratories, Inc. 1984. Embryofetal toxicity and
teratogenicity study of acetonitrile in New Zealand White rabbits
(Segment II evaluation). Washington, DC: Office of Toxic Substances
submission. Microfiche No. OTS 507279.
17. Saillenfait, A.M., P. Bonnet, J.P. Guenier et al. 1993. Relative
developmental toxicities of inhaled aliphatic mononitriles in rats.
Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 20:365-375.
18. Johannsen, F.R., G.J. Levinskas, P.E. Berteau et al. 1986.
Evaluation of the teratogenic potential of three aliphatic nitriles in
the rat. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 7:33-40.
19. U.S. EPA. 1991. Guidelines for Developmental Toxicity Risk
Assessment. Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC. EPA/600/FR-91/001.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 372

    Environmental protection, Community right-to-know, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and Toxic chemicals.

    Dated: February 25, 2013.
Arnold E. Layne,
Director, Office of Information Analysis and Access.
[FR Doc. 2013-04933 Filed 3-4-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 39783]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17676]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP17-967-000.
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP submits tariff filing
per 154.203: JntStlmtExtAgmt, Dkts RP88-67, 88-81, 88-221, 90-
119, 91-4, 17-964.
    Filed Date: 08/09/2017.
    Accession Number: 20170809-5117.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 16, 2017.

    Docket Numbers: RP17-968-000.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Northern Natural Gas Company submits tariff filing per
154.204: 20170810 Carlton Flow Obligations to be effective 11/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 08/10/2017.
    Accession Number: 20170810-5047.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, August 22, 2017.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and Sec.  385.214) on or
before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests
may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to
the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 10, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-17676 Filed 8-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P