[Federal Register: November 28, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 228)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 67251-67256]
[DOCID:fr28no07-12]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2007-0093]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone; Kahului Harbor, Maui, HI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary interim rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is creating a temporary security zone in the
waters of Kahului Bay and Kahului Harbor, Maui, and on designated
adjacent areas of land. This zone is intended to enable the Coast Guard
and its law enforcement partners to better protect people, vessels, and
facilities in and around Kahului Bay and Kahului Harbor during the
transit of the Hawaii Superferry. This rule complements, but does not
replace or supersede, existing regulations that establish a moving 100-
yard security zone around large passenger vessels like the Superferry.

DATES: This rule is effective from 12:01 a.m. (HST) on December 1,
2007, through 11:59 p.m. (HST) on January 31, 2008. Comments and
related material must reach the Coast Guard on or before December 19,
2007.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments and related material, identified by
Coast Guard docket number USCG-2007-0093, by any of the three methods
listed below. To avoid duplication, please use only one of the
following methods:
    (1) Mail: Lieutenant Sean Fahey, U.S. Coast Guard District 14 (dl),
Room 9-130, PJKK Federal Building, 300 Ala Moana Blvd., Honolulu,
Hawaii 96850.
    (2) Electronically: E-mail to Lieutenant Sean Fahey at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>using the subject line ``Comment--Maui Security
Zone.''
    (3) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) Online: http://www.regulations.gov.
    All comments will be reviewed as they are received. We may change
this rule based on your comments.
    Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the
docket are part of docket USCG-2007-0093 and are available for
inspection and copying at U.S. Coast Guard District 14 (dl), Room

9-130, between 7 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant Sean Fahey, U.S. Coast
Guard District 14 at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for this
temporary rule. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. It would be contrary to
the public interest to delay implementing this temporary rule, as any
delay might result in damage or injury to the public, the Hawaii
Superferry (HSF) and its passengers and crew, other vessels,
facilities, and law enforcement personnel. Though operation of the HSF
from Oahu to Maui was temporarily enjoined by the state circuit court
in Maui, that injunction was lifted on November 14, 2007, following
action by the Hawaii State legislature, and service to Maui is
advertised to resume on December 1, 2007. Given recent assessments by
the Maui Police Department that waterborne obstruction tactics similar
to those used in Kauai in August 2007 are likely to be employed in Maui
as well when the HSF resumes service there, it is critical that this
rule be in place so that local, State, and Federal public safety
officials can adequately ensure maritime safety and security, and
secure the observances of rights and obligations of the United States.
    The main obstruction tactic employed by waterborne protesters in
Kauai in August 2007 was to physically place themselves directly in the
path of the HSF as it attempted to enter the harbor. Several
obstructers ashore threw rocks and bottles at U.S. Coast Guard
personnel. These actions are dangerous not only to the obstructers
themselves--some of whom used or incited children and juveniles in
support of their obstruction efforts--but also to the HSF, its
passengers and crew, and law enforcement personnel working to ensure
the vessel's safe passage.
    Groups opposing the lawful operation of the HSF continue to vow to
impede its transit utilizing these same dangerous tactics. These
opposition groups have started several internet forums to encourage and
coordinate support for their efforts. The danger such obstruction
tactics pose is illustrated by an article posted on November 5, 2007,
on Surferspath.com, a popular Web site for Hawaiian surfers. In this
article, two prominent opposition members urge those who oppose the
operation of the Superferry to take ``the last step of non-violent
resistance,'' and prepare themselves for the possibility of ``physical
injury or death'' that may result from obstructing the Superferry.
These preparations include making the ``proper arrangements,''
preparing a ``last will and testament'' and engaging in a ``cleansing
ceremony to prepare your body, mind, and spirit to greet the Spiritual
Hierarchy that awaits your return.'' The letter goes on to say that,
``[t]here is also the possibility of accident in the turmoil of
numerous boats, swimmers, and surfers in an ocean environment. In that
sense you have to be prepared at the level of the Native American who
decided when it was `a good day to die.' ''
    The Coast Guard cannot disregard such adamant safety and security
threats. Consequently, this rule is necessary to prevent damage or
injury to vessels, persons, and waterfront facilities, including the
HSF, its passengers and crew, law enforcement personnel working to
ensure the vessel's safe passage, and the obstructers themselves,
arising from these dangerous and unlawful obstruction tactics. Any
delay in implementing this temporary rule would be contrary to the
public interest and would jeopardize the security and safety of the
public, the HSF and its passengers and crew, other vessels, facilities,
and law enforcement personnel.
    For the same reasons, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard
finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than
30 days after publication in the Federal Register. Although the Coast
Guard has good cause to issue this temporary rule without first
publishing a proposed rule, you are invited to submit post-promulgation
comments and related material regarding this rule on or before December
19, 2007. We may change this temporary interim rule based on the
comments received. All comments received will be posted, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal
information you have provided. We have an agreement with the Department
of Transportation (DOT) for their Docket Management Facility to process
online submissions to Coast Guard dockets. You may review the
Department of Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit
http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

Background and Purpose

    The Hawaii Superferry (HSF) is a 349-foot large passenger vessel
documented by the U.S. Coast Guard with an endorsement for coastwise
trade, and certified for large passenger vessel service in the United
States. The HSF, operating Hawaii's first inter-island vehicle-
passenger service, is intended to provide service among the islands of
Oahu, Maui, and Kauai. The sole port in Maui that can accommodate the
HSF is Kahului Harbor. The sole port in Kauai that can accommodate the
HSF is Nawiliwili Harbor.
    The HSF inaugurated commercial service from Oahu to both Maui and
Kauai on August 26, 2007. The voyage to and from Maui on that date
occurred without incident. However, in Kauai, nearly 40 swimmers and
obstructers on kayaks and surfboards blocked Nawiliwili Harbor's
navigable channel entrance to prevent the lawful entry of the HSF into
Kauai. Other demonstrators ashore threw rocks and bottles at Coast
Guard personnel who were conveying detained obstructers to shore.
    On the following day, August 27, 2007, the HSF again sailed to and
from Maui without incident. Upon arrival in Kauai, however,
approximately 70 persons entered the water again to physically block
the channel entrance, thereby preventing the HSF from docking in
Nawiliwili Harbor. Due to the difficulty in maneuvering in the small
area of Nawiliwili Harbor, and in the interest of ensuring the safety
of the protesters, the HSF's master chose not to enter the channel
until the Coast Guard cleared the channel of obstructers. However,
because the vessel remained outside the harbor, and because the
obstructers did not approach within 100 yards of the vessel, the
existing security zone for large passenger vessels (33 CFR 165.1410)
did not provide the Coast Guard with the authority to control
obstructer entry into Nawiliwili Harbor or clear the channel of
obstructers before the HSF commenced its transit into the harbor. After
waiting 3 hours, and with nearly 20 obstructers still in the water
actively blocking the HSF, the HSF's master, after consulting with
company officials, made the decision to return to Oahu without mooring
in Kauai.
    On August 28, HSF officials announced the ``indefinite'' suspension
of commercial operations. Since that date, the HSF has only sailed in
commercial service to either Kauai or Maui once; on September 8, 2007,
to pick up and return cars to Oahu that were stranded on Maui after the

suspension of commercial service on August 28. This sailing was the
product of a stipulated agreement in an ongoing lawsuit (discussed
further below) involving HSF and environmental groups opposed to the
HSF operating in and out of Kahului Harbor, Maui.
    Shortly after the company announced its suspension of operations on
August 28, the trial court judge in the ongoing state court proceeding
referenced in the previous paragraph issued a temporary restraining
order, which was followed by a preliminary injunction several weeks
later, prohibiting HSF from utilizing the harbor improvements in
Kahului Harbor, Maui. This injunction was the product of a Hawaii
Supreme Court determination that the Hawaii Environmental Protection
Act (HEPA) required the state to conduct an environmental assessment of
the effects of the harbor improvements that were necessary to
accommodate the HSF in Kahului Harbor. Following the Supreme Court
decision, the trial court determined that HEPA required the
environmental assessment to be conducted before the HSF could use those
harbor improvements; and since that assessment had not occurred, the
injunction was a necessary remedy. The injunction only pertained to
Kahului Harbor; it did not apply in Nawiliwili Harbor, Kauai. However,
the HSF voluntarily decided not to sail to Kauai while the court case
was ongoing.
    In response to this judicial action, the governor called the Hawaii
legislature into special session to consider whether to grant
legislative relief to HSF. The legislature passed a bill during this
special session called Act 2, which the governor signed into law. Act 2
allowed the HSF to utilize the harbor improvements in Maui and Kauai
while all necessary environmental assessments were being conducted. The
trial judge in Maui determined that this legislation overcame the
requirement in HEPA that caused him to enjoin HSF from utilizing of the
harbor improvements in Maui, and in a ruling on November 14, 2007, he
dissolved and vacated the injunction. This opened the door to HSF
resuming commercial service to Maui.
    Notwithstanding the fact that the HSF did not face waterborne
obstructers in Kahului Harbor during any of its commercial voyages
there, recent intelligence and assessments by the Maui Police
Department indicate a substantial likelihood that certain elements in
Maui, disaffected by the process that led to adoption of Act 2 and
vacation of the injunction, plan to adopt the dangerous tactics used by
the obstructers in Kauai in an effort to prevent the HSF from safely
arriving in Maui. Individuals and groups have organized rallies and
started several internet forums to encourage and coordinate support for
their efforts. The dangerous and unlawful intent of these individuals
and groups is clear, as is their resolve.
    This temporary security zone is in response to the threat posed by
would-be obstructers in and around Kahului Harbor to HSF and its crew
and passengers, law enforcement officers working to ensure HSF's safe
transit, and the obstructers themselves. By designating significant
portions of the waters of Kahului Harbor and Kahului Bay, and specified
areas of land adjacent to the water, as a security zone, activated for
enforcement 60 minutes before the HSF's arrival into the zone through
10 minutes after its departure from the zone, this temporary security
zone rule provides the Coast Guard and its law enforcement partners the
authority to prevent persons and vessels from entering or remaining in
the water with the intent of using themselves as human barriers to
impede the HSF's safe passage.

Discussion of Rule

    This rule creates a temporary security zone in most of the waters
of Kahului Harbor, Maui; in waters of Kahului Bay, Maui; and on
designated areas of land adjacent to Kahului Harbor. This temporary
security zone is effective from 12:01 a.m. (HST) on December 1, 2007,
through 11:59 p.m. (HST) on January 31, 2008. The security zone will be
activated for enforcement 60 minutes before the HSF's arrival into the
zone, and will remain activated for 10 minutes after the HSF's
departure from the zone. The activation of the zone for enforcement
will be announced by marine information broadcast and by a red flag,
illuminated between sunset and sunrise, posted at the following
locations: at Gate 1 at the main entrance to the harbor; on Pier No. 2;
and at the harbor entrance on Wharf Street. During its period of
activation and enforcement, entry into the land and water areas of the
security zone is prohibited without the permission of the Captain of
the Port, Honolulu, or his or her designated representative.
    In preparing this temporary rule, the Coast Guard made sure to
consider the rights of lawful protestors. To that end, the Coast Guard
excluded from the security zone a defined region which creates a
sizeable area of water in which demonstrators may lawfully assemble and
convey their message in a safe manner to their intended audience. This
area of the harbor not included in the security zone is completely
accessible to anyone who desires to enter the water, and is fully
visible to observers ashore, at the HSF mooring facility, aboard the
HSF when transiting the harbor, and from the air.
    The Coast Guard also took into account the lawful users of Kahului
Harbor and Kahului Bay in its creation of this temporary rule. As
previously noted, the rule will only be activated 1 hour before the
HSF's arrival into port, and will be deactivated 10 minutes after the
HSF departs the port. Kahului Harbor and Kahului Bay are fully
available to all users during the period when the zone is not
activated. Furthermore, the rule affords those desiring to use the
harbor and surrounding waters and land areas with the opportunity to
and a process for requesting permission of the Captain of the Port to
enter the zone while it is activated in a manner that will not endanger
any vessel, waterfront facility, the port, or any person.
    The security zone incorporates the minimum land and water areas
necessary to ensure the purposes underlying the rule's creation are
served. Waters outside of the harbor are included in the zone to ensure
that the HSF is able to line up, unimpeded, on the range that guides it
safely into Kahului Harbor. The breakwaters on either side of the
harbor entrance are included in the zone to ensure that would-be
obstructers do not have a ready staging point for attempting to block
the very narrow entrance to Kahului Harbor. Pier No. 2, to which the
HSF ties up, is included in the security zone, is entirely fenced off,
and not legally accessible except to authorized personnel. Other than
the designated protest area, the waters of Kahului Harbor, including
areas of the harbor not navigable by the HSF, are included in the zone
to prevent would-be obstructers from interfering with law enforcement
vessels in the harbor that are working to ensure the HSF's safe
passage.
    Under 33 CFR 165.33, entry by persons or vessels into the security
zone during a period of zone activation is prohibited unless authorized
by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Honolulu or his or her
designated representatives.
    Operation of any type of vessel, including every description of
watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being
used, as a means of transportation on water, within the security zone
while the zone is activated is prohibited. If a vessel is found to be
operating within the security zone without permission of the

Captain of the Port, Honolulu while the zone is activated, the vessel
is subject to seizure and forfeiture.
    All persons and vessels permitted in the security zone while the
zone is activated must comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard
Captain of the Port or the designated on-scene patrol personnel. These
personnel include commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the
Coast Guard and other persons permitted by law to enforce this
regulation. Upon being hailed by an authorized vessel or law
enforcement officer using siren, radio, flashing light, loudhailer,
voice command, or other means, the operator of the vessel must proceed
as directed.
    If authorized passage through the security zone, a vessel must
operate at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course and
must proceed as directed by the Captain of the Port or his or her
designated representatives. While underway with permission of the
Captain of the Port or his or her designated representatives, under 33
CFR 165.1408, no person or vessel is allowed within 100 yards of the
HSF when it is underway, moored, position-keeping, or at anchor, unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port or his or her designated
representatives.
    When conditions permit, the Captain of the Port, or his or her
designated representatives, may permit vessels that are at anchor,
restricted in their ability to maneuver, or constrained by draft to
remain within the security zone during the enforcement period in order
to ensure navigational safety. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant,
or petty officer, and any other person permitted by law, may enforce
the regulations in this section.

Regulatory Evaluation

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does
not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that a
full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. This expectation is based on
the short activation and enforcement duration of the security zone
created by this temporary rule, as well as the limited geographic area
affected by the security zone.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule will have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. While we are aware that the affected area has small entities,
including canoe and boating clubs and small commercial businesses that
provide recreational services, we anticipate that there will be little
or no impact to these small entities due to the narrowly tailored scope
of this temporary rule, as well as the fact that such entities can
request permission from the Captain of the Port to enter the security
zone when it is activated.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding this rule so that they may better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. If this
rule will affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact Lieutenant Sean Fahey, U.S.
Coast Guard District 14, at<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Coast Guard will not
retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this
rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

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

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children. While some obstructers, both on
land on and shore, used small children in furtherance of their
obstruction activities during the August 26 and 27 HSF arrivals into
Kauai, and while online forums and other sources indicate that some
organizers are actively recruiting adolescents and small children with
the intent of putting them in harm's way should the HSF attempt to
enter either Kauai or Maui, any heightened harm faced by children as a
result of these tactics has no relation to the creation of this rule.
Instead, those heightened risks are entirely the product of persons who
recruit and employ adolescents and children to put themselves at risk
of death or serious physical injury by attempting to physically
obstruct the passage of a large passenger vessel in a small harbor.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination

with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes.

Energy Effects

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

Technical Standards

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

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.1D,
which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors in this case that limit the
use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction.
Therefore, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g) of the Commandant
Instruction M16475.1D, this rule is categorically excluded from further
environmental documentation. An ``Environmental Analysis Checklist''
and ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' are available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add a new Sec.  165.T14-164 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T14-164  Security Zone; Kahului Harbor, Maui, HI.

    (a) Location. The following land areas, and water areas from the
surface of the water to the ocean floor, are a security zone that is
activated as described in paragraph (c) of this section, and enforced
subject to the provisions of paragraph (d) of this section:
    (1) All waters of Kahului Harbor, Maui, shoreward of the Kahului
Harbor COLREGS DEMARCATION LINE (see 33 CFR 80.1460), except for a zone
extending from the shoreline with the following three legs as
boundaries:
    (i) A leg extending in a straight line between Buoy ``10'' (LLNR
28375) and Buoy ``12'' (LLNR 28380);
    (ii) A leg extending in a straight line between Buoy ``10'' (LLNR
28375) and the nearest shoreline point; and
    (iii) A leg extending in a straight line between Buoy ``12'' (LLNR
28380) and the fence line at the southwestern base of Pier Two, at
position (20[deg]53.589[min] N, 156[deg]28.084[min] W).
    (2) Pier No. 2 in Kahului Harbor.
    (3) The eastern breakwater at the entrance of Kahului Harbor,
beginning at the east break wall (20[deg]53.958[min] N,
156[deg]28.161[min] W).
    (4) The western breakwater at the entrance of Kahului Harbor,
beginning at the berm on the west break wall (20[deg]53.925[min] N,
156[deg]28.611[min] W).
    (5) All waters of Kahului Bay bounded on the south by the COLREGS.
DEMARCATION LINE (see 33 CFR 80.1460); bounded on the north by line of
latitude 20[deg]56[min] N; bounded on the west by a straight line drawn
from the berm on the west break wall (20[deg]53.925[min] N,
156[deg]28.611[min] W) at a direction of 330[deg] to the line of
latitude 20[deg]56[min] N; and bounded on the east by a straight line
drawn from the east break wall (20[deg]53.958[min] N,
156[deg]28.161[min] W) at a direction of 030[deg] and ending at the
line of latitude 20[deg]56[min] N.
    (b) Effective period. This section is effective from 12:01 a.m.
(HST) on December 1, 2007, through 11:59 p.m. (HST) on January 31,
2008. It will be activated for enforcement as described in paragraph
(c) of this section.
    (c) Enforcement periods. The zone described in paragraph (a) of
this section will be activated for enforcement 60 minutes before the
Hawaii Superferry's arrival into the zone and will remain activated
until 10 minutes after the Hawaii Superferry's departure from the zone.
The activation of the zone for enforcement will be announced by marine
information broadcast and by a red flag, illuminated between sunset and
sunrise, posted at the following locations: At Gate 1 at the main
entrance to the harbor; on Pier No. 2; and at the harbor entrance on
Wharf Street.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Under 33 CFR 165.33, entry by persons or
vessels into the security zone created by this section and activated as
described in paragraph (c) of this section is prohibited unless
authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Honolulu or his or
her designated representatives. Operation of any type of vessel,
including every description of watercraft or other artificial
contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of
transportation on water, within the security zone is prohibited. If a
vessel is found to be operating within the security zone without
permission of the Captain of the Port, Honolulu, and refuses to leave,
the vessel is subject to seizure and forfeiture.
    (2) All persons and vessels permitted in the security zone must
comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or
the designated on-scene-patrol personnel. These personnel comprise
commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the Coast Guard and other
persons permitted by law to enforce this regulation. Upon being hailed
by an authorized vessel or law enforcement officer using siren, radio,
flashing light, loudhailer, voice command, or other means, the operator
of a vessel must proceed as directed.
    (3) If authorized passage through the security zone, a vessel must
operate at the minimum speed necessary to maintain a safe course and
must proceed as directed by the Captain of the Port or his or her
designated representatives. While underway with permission of the
Captain of the Port or

his or her designated representatives, no person or vessel is allowed
within 100 yards of the Hawaii Superferry when it is underway, moored,
position-keeping, or at anchor, unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port or his or her designated representatives.
    (4) Persons desiring to transit the security zone in this section
may contact the Captain of the Port at telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>
or on VHF channel 12 to seek permission to transit the area. If
permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply with the
instructions of the Captain of the Port or his or her designated
representatives. When conditions permit, the Captain of the Port, or
his or her designated representatives, may permit vessels that are at
anchor, restricted in their ability to maneuver, or constrained by
draft to remain within the security zone in order to ensure
navigational safety.
    (e) Enforcement. Any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer, and any other Captain of the Port representative permitted by
law, may enforce this temporary security zone.

    Dated: November 21, 2007.
Sally Brice-O'Hara,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fourteenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 07-5872 Filed 11-26-07; 1:53 pm]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register: December 28, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 249)]
[Notices]
[Page 78180-78181]
[DOCID:fr28de06-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No.: P-12751-000]

AquaEnergy Group, Ltd.; Notice of Application and Applicant-
Prepared EA Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Motions To Intervene and
Protests, Ready for Environmental Analysis, and Soliciting Comments,
and Terms and Conditions, Recommendations, and Prescriptions

December 18, 2006.

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application and
applicant-prepared environmental assessment has been filed with the
Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Minor License.
    b. Project No.: P-12751-000.
    c. Date Filed: November 8, 2006.
    d. Applicant: AquaEnergy Group, Ltd.
    e. Name of Project: Makah Bay Offshore Wave Energy Pilot Project.
    f. Location: Pacific Ocean in Makah Bay, Clallam County, Washington
near the city of Neah Bay, Washington. The project would occupy about
one acre of land on the Makah Indian Reservation and about seven acres
of the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary administered by the U.S.
Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
and Flattery Rocks National Wildlife Refuge administered by the U.S.
Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mary Jane Parks, P.O. Box 1276, Mercer
Island, WA 98059,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Nick Jayjack,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    j. Deadline for filing motions to intervene and protests, comments,
terms and conditions, recommendations, and prescriptions: 60 days from
the issuance of this notice. All reply comments must be filed with the
Commission within 105 days from the date of this notice.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an
intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to
the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a
particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document
on that resource agency.
    Motions to intervene, protests, comments, terms and conditions,
recommendations, and prescriptions may be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions
on the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-

Filing'' link.
    k. This application has been accepted for filing and is now ready
for environmental analysis.
    l. The project would consist of: (1) Four, 250-kilowatt wave energy
conversion buoys (``AquaBuOYs'') and an associated mooring/anchoring
and electrical connection system placed 3.7 miles offshore in water
depths of about 150 feet over a rectangular area about 625 feet by 450
feet of ocean floor; (2) a metal shore station that would be about 15
feet long by 15 feet wide by 10 feet high and located just inland of
Hobuck Beach (on the Makah Indian Reservation near Neah Bay,
Washington) adjacent to an existing power line for interconnection--the
shore station would contain equipment necessary to connect to the
electrical grid; (3) a driveway and parking area at the metal shore
station; and (4) a 3.7-mile long submarine cable anchored to the ocean
floor and connecting from one of the buoy's (``collector buoy'') power
cable to the metal shore station. The total installed capacity of the
project would be 1 megawatt, and the project would generate about
1,500,000 kilowatt-hours annually. AquaEnergy proposes to provide the
power generated by the project to the Clallam County PUD for use in its
service area.
    m. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at 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>or toll-free at 1-
866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is also available for
inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above.
    Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp
 to be notified via e-mail of new filings and

issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    n. Any qualified applicant desiring to file a competing application
must submit to the Commission, on or before the specified deadline date
for the particular application, a competing development application, or
a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely
notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing
development application no later than 120 days after the specified
deadline date for the particular application. Applications for
preliminary permits will not be accepted in response to this notice.
    A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address,
and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an
unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may
be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development
application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent
must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice.
    Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in
accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18
CFR 385.210, 385.211, 385.214. In determining the appropriate action to
take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments
filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with
the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any
comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or
before the specified comment date for the particular application.
    All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title
``PROTEST'', ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', ``NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE
COMPETING APPLICATION,'' ``COMPETING APPLICATION,'' ``COMMENTS,''
``REPLY COMMENTS,'' ``RECOMMENDATIONS,'' ``TERMS AND CONDITIONS,'' or
``PRESCRIPTIONS;'' (2) set forth in the heading the name of the
applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing
responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the
person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments,
recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions must set forth
their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of
18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly
from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must
be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the
particular application. A copy of all other filings in reference to
this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons
listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this
proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
    o. A license applicant must file no later than 60 days following
the date of issuance of this notice: (1) A copy of the water quality
certification; (2) a copy of the request for certification, including
proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the request;
or (3) evidence of waiver of water quality certification.
    p. Procedural schedule: The application will be processed according
to the following Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule
will be made as appropriate.
    Notice of the availability of the EA (single EA): May 2007.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-22204 Filed 12-27-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 81 (Monday, April 27, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23366-23367]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08878]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2019-N-4824]

Office of Minority Health and Health Equity Strategic Priorities;
Reopening of the Comment Period

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; reopening of the comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is
reopening the comment period for the notice, published in the Federal
Register of January 3, 2020. In the notice, FDA opened a public docket
to solicit input and comments from interested stakeholders, including
racial and ethnic minority, underrepresented, and underserved
populations on the Office of Minority Health and Health Equity
Strategic Priorities (OMHHE). FDA is reopening the comment period to
update comments and to receive any new information.

DATES: FDA is reopening the comment period on the notice published
January 3, 2020 (85 FR 316). Submit either electronic or written
comments by June 26, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before June 26, 2020. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of June 26, 2020. Comments received
by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2019-N-4824 for ``Office of Minority Health and Health Equity
Strategic Priorities.'' Received comments, those filed in a timely
manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for
those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between
9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine Merenda, Food and Drug
Administration, Office of Minority Health and Health Equity, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 2382,

Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of January 3, 2020
(85 FR 316), FDA opened a public docket to solicit input and comments
from interested stakeholders, including racial and ethnic minority,
underrepresented, and underserved populations in establishing strategic
priorities for OMHHE.
    Interested persons were originally given until February 28, 2020,
to comment on the OMHHE.
    Following publication of the January 3, 2020, notice, FDA received
a request to allow interested persons additional time to comment. The
requester asserted that the time period of 60 days was insufficient to
respond fully to FDA's specific requests for comments and to allow
potential respondents to thoroughly evaluate and address pertinent
issues.
    FDA is reopening the comment period until June 26, 2020. The Agency
believes that an additional 60 days will allow adequate time for
interested persons to respond to FDA's specific requests for comments
and to receive any new information.

    Dated: April 21, 2020.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-08878 Filed 4-24-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 225 (Wednesday, November 23, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 71620]
[FR Doc No: 2022-25557]

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

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: RP23-186-000.
    Applicants: Discovery Gas Transmission LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 2023 HMRE Surcharge Filing to
be effective 1/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 11/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20221115-5001.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP23-187-000.
    Applicants: East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rates--Nov 2022
Clean-up Filing to be effective 12/15/2022.
    Filed Date: 11/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20221115-5008.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP23-188-000.
    Applicants: East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate--Perm Release
Oglethorpe to Eastman to be effective 11/15/2022.
    Filed Date: 11/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20221115-5025.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP23-189-000.
    Applicants: Sierrita Gas Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Sierrita Opertional Purchase and
Sales Report 2022 to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 11/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20221115-5053.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP23-190-000.
    Applicants: Midwestern Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Revision to Part 8, Section 25
to be effective 12/16/2022.
    Filed Date: 11/15/22.
    Accession Number: 20221115-5085.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 11/28/22.

    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.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    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 15, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-25557 Filed 11-22-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 52 (Tuesday, March 18, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 15201]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06005]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

Petrotech Oil & Gas, Inc.; Order of Suspension of Trading

March 14, 2014.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Petrotech Oil & Gas, Inc. because of questions regarding the accuracy
of publicly available information about the company's operations.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed company.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the
above-listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on
March 14, 2014, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on March 27, 2014.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-06005 Filed 3-14-14; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: March 27, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 58)]
[Notices]
[Page 13427-13428]
[DOCID:fr27mr09-44]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2801-027]

Littleville Power Company, Inc.; Notice of Availability of
Environmental Assessment

March 23, 2009.
    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations, 18 CFR Part
380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of Energy Projects has
reviewed the application for a subsequent license for the 1.14-megawatt
Glendale Hydroelectric Project, located on the Housatonic River, in the
Town of Stockbridge, Berkshire County, Massachusetts, and has prepared
an Environmental Assessment (EA). In the EA, Commission staff analyze
the potential environmental effects of relicensing the project and
conclude that issuing a subsequent license for the project, with
appropriate environmental

measures, would not constitute a major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human environment.
    A copy of the EA is on file with the Commission and is available
for public inspection. The EA may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the
docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
field to access documents. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for
TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    Comments on the EA should be filed within 30 days from the issuance
date of this notice, and should be addressed to the Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Room 1-A,
Washington, DC 20426. Please affix ``Glendale Project No. 2801-027'' to
all comments. Comments may be filed electronically via Internet in lieu
of paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site under the ``eFiling'' link. For further information, contact
Kristen Murphy at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-6872 Filed 3-26-09; 8:45 am]


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 33 (Thursday, February 19, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8824-8826]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03075]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2015-0018]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulation; Charleston Race Week, Charleston
Harbor, Charleston, SC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to issue a special local regulation
on the waters of Charleston Harbor in Charleston, SC during the
Charleston Race Week on April 17, 2015 through April 19, 2015. This
special local regulation is necessary to ensure the safety of
participants, spectators, and the general public during the event. The
special local regulation would temporarily restrict vessel traffic in a
portion of Charleston Harbor, preventing non-participant vessels from
entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the
regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston
or a designated representative.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before March 23, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using
any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions
on submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of
these three methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Chief Warrant Officer Christopher Ruleman, Sector
Charleston Office of Waterways Management, Coast Guard; telephone (843)
740-3184, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions
on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Barbara Hairston,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

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

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online at
http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but
please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment,
it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when
it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number USCG-2015-0018 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number USCG-2015-0018 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

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

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one on or before March 15, 2015, using one of the methods
specified under ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public
meeting would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later
notice in the Federal Register.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the proposed rule is the Coast Guard's
Authority to establish special local regulations: 33 U.S.C 1233. The
purpose of the proposed rule is to ensure safety of life on the
navigable water of the United States during the Charleston Race Week.

C. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard is proposing to establish special local regulations
on the waters of Charleston Harbor in Charleston, South Carolina during
Charleston Race Week, a series of sailboat races. The races are
scheduled to take place on Friday, April 17, 2015 through Sunday, April
19, 2015. Approximately 300 sailboats are anticipated to participate in
the races, and approximately 15 spectator vessels are expected to
attend the event. Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area may contact the
Captain of the Port Charleston by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a
designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16, to request
authorization. If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in,
or remain within the regulated area is granted by the Captain of the
Port Charleston or a designated representative, all persons and vessels
receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions of the
Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative. The
Coast Guard will provide notice of the special local regulation by
Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene
designated representatives.

D. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    The economic impact of this proposed rule is not significant for
the following reasons: (1) Non-participant persons and vessels may
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area
during the enforcement periods if authorized by the Captain of the Port
Charleston or a designated representative; (2) vessels not able to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area
without authorization from the Captain of the Port Charleston or a
designated representative may operate in the surrounding areas during
the enforcement period; and (3) the Coast Guard will provide advance
notification of the special local regulation to the local maritime
community by Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered the impact of this proposed rule on small entities. The
Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This rule may affect the following entities, some of
which may be small entities: the owner or operators of vessels
intending to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the
regulated area during the enforcement period. For the reasons discussed
in Regulatory Planning and Review section above, this rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

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

4. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule will not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520.).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

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

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

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

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice

Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

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

12. Energy Effects

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

13. Technical Standards

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

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule involves a special local regulation issued in conjunction with a
regatta or marine parade. This rule is categorically excluded from
further review under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant
Instruction. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

    Marine Safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1233

0
2. Add a temporary Sec.  100.35T07-0018 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.35T07-0018  Special Local Regulation; Charleston Race Week,
Charleston Harbor, Charleston, SC.

    (a) Regulated Area. The rule establishes special local regulations
on certain waters of Charleston Harbor in Charleston, South Carolina.
The special local regulations will be enforced daily from 8:30 a.m.
until 5:00 p.m. on April 17, 2015 through April 19, 2015. The special
local regulations consist of the following three race areas.
    (1) Race Area #1. All waters encompassed within an 800 yard radius
of position 32[deg]46'39'' N, 79[deg]55'10'' W.
    (2) Race Area #2. All waters encompassed within a 900 yard radius
of position 32[deg]45'48'' N, 79[deg]54'46'' W.
    (3) Race Area #3. All waters encompassed within a 900 yard radius
of position 32[deg]45'44'' N, 79[deg]53'32'' W.
    (b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and
Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Charleston in the enforcement of the regulated
areas.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels, except those
participating in Charleston Race Week or serving as safety vessels are
prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within the regulated area. Persons and vessels desiring to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area
may contact the Captain of the Port Charleston by telephone at (843)
740-7050, or a designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16,
to request authorization. If authorization to enter, transit through,
anchor in, or remain within the regulated area is granted by the
Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative, all
persons and vessels receiving such authorization must comply with the
instructions of the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated
representative.
    (2) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by
Marine Safety Information Bulletins, Local Notice to Mariners,
Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated representatives.
    (d) Effective Date. This rule is effective and will be enforced
from 8:30 a.m. April 17, 2015 through 5:00 p.m. April 19, 2015.

    Dated: January 28, 2015.
B.D. Falk,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard. Acting Captain of the Port Charleston.
[FR Doc. 2015-03075 Filed 2-18-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 73 (Tuesday, April 16, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22435-22438]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08904]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0328; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-184-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede an existing airworthiness directive
(AD) that applies to certain The Boeing Company Model 747-400 and -400D
series airplanes. The existing AD currently requires repetitive
inspections to detect cracks in the floor panel attachment fastener
holes of the Section 41 upper deck floor beam upper chords, and
corrective actions if necessary; and repetitive post-repair and post-
modification inspections, and corrective actions if necessary. Since we
issued that AD, an evaluation by the design approval holder (DAH)
indicated that certain upper chords of the upper deck floor beam are
subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). A replacement was developed
to support the airplane's limit of validity (LOV) of the engineering
data that support the established structural maintenance program. This
proposed AD would add repetitive inspections of Section 44 upper deck
floor beam upper chords, and corrective actions if necessary;
repetitive post-repair and post-modification inspections, and
corrective actions if necessary; and replacing the upper deck floor
beam upper chords. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct
fatigue cracking in certain upper chords of the upper deck floor beam,
which could become large and cause the floor beams to become severed
and result in rapid decompression or reduced controllability of the
airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 31, 2013.

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 AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box
3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
You may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
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; 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 Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roger Caldwell, Aerospace Engineer,
Technical Operations Center, ANM-100D, FAA, Denver Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 26805 East 68th Avenue, Room 214, Denver,
CO 80249; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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-2013-0328;
Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-184-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 because of 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

    Structural fatigue damage is progressive. It begins as minute
cracks, and those cracks grow under the action of repeated stresses.
This can happen because of normal operational conditions and design
attributes, or because of isolated situations or incidents such as
material defects, poor fabrication quality, or corrosion pits, dings,
or scratches. Fatigue damage can occur locally, in small areas or
structural design details, or globally. Global fatigue damage is
general degradation of large areas of structure with similar structural
details and stress levels. Multiple-site damage is global damage that
occurs in a large structural element such as a single rivet line of a
lap splice joining two large skin panels. Global damage can also occur
in multiple elements such as adjacent frames or stringers. Multiple-
site-damage and multiple-element-damage cracks are typically too small
initially to be reliably detected with normal inspection methods.
Without intervention, these cracks will grow, and eventually compromise
the structural integrity of the airplane, in a condition known as
widespread fatigue damage (WFD). As an airplane ages, WFD will likely
occur, and will certainly occur if the airplane is operated long enough
without any intervention.
    The FAA's WFD final rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) became
effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD rule requires certain actions to
prevent structural failure due to WFD throughout the operational life
of certain existing transport category airplanes and all of these
airplanes that will be certificated in the future. For existing and
future airplanes subject to the WFD rule, the rule requires that DAHs
and applicants establish a LOV of the engineering data that support the
structural maintenance program. Operators affected by the WFD rule may
not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, unless an extended LOV is approved.
    The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, November 15, 2010) does not require
identifying and developing maintenance actions if the DAHs can show
that such actions are not necessary to prevent WFD before the airplane
reaches the LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend on accomplishment of
future maintenance actions. As stated in the WFD rule, any maintenance
actions necessary to reach the LOV will be mandated by airworthiness
directives through separate rulemaking actions.
    In the context of WFD, this action is necessary to enable DAHs to
propose LOVs that allow operators the longest operational lives for
their airplanes, and still ensure that WFD will not occur. This
approach allows for an implementation strategy that provides
flexibility to DAHs in determining the timing of service information
development (with FAA approval), while providing operators with
certainty regarding the LOV applicable to their airplanes.
    On May 1, 2009, we issued AD 2009-10-06, Amendment 39-15901 (74 FR
22424, May 13, 2009), for certain Boeing Model 747-400 and 747-400D
series airplanes. That AD requires repetitive inspections to detect
cracks in the floor panel attachment fastener holes of the Section 41
upper deck floor beam upper chords, and related investigative and
corrective actions if necessary. That AD resulted from reports of
cracks found in the Section 41 upper deck floor beam upper chords. We
issued that AD to detect and correct cracks in these chords, which
could become large and cause the floor beams to become severed and
result in rapid decompression or reduced controllability of the
airplane.

Actions Since Existing AD 2009-10-06, Amendment 39-15901 (74 FR 22424,
May 13, 2009) Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2009-10-06, Amendment 39-15901 (74 FR 22424, May
13, 2009), an evaluation by the DAH indicating that certain upper
chords of the upper deck floor beam are subject to WFD. The replacement
was developed to support the airplane's LOV of the engineering data
that support the established structural maintenance program.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1,
dated September 19, 2012. For information on the procedures and
compliance times, see this service information at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for Docket No. FAA-2013-0328.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we 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.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would retain all requirements of AD 2009-10-06,
Amendment 39-15901 (74 FR 22424, May 13, 2009). This proposed AD would
add repetitive inspections of Section 44 upper deck floor beam upper
chords, and corrective actions if necessary; repetitive post-repair and
post-modification inspections, and corrective actions if necessary; and
replacing the upper deck floor beam upper chords.
    In addition, the phrase ``corrective actions'' might be used in
this proposed AD. ``Corrective actions'' are actions that correct or
address any condition found. Corrective actions in an AD could include,
for example, repairs.

Changes to Existing Language in Paragraph (g) of This AD

    We have revised paragraph (g) of this AD to clarify the terminology
and repetitive inspections. We have removed the term ``related
investigative actions'' from the paragraph and added a sentence
describing the repetitive inspections for airplanes on which a repair
or modification has been done.

Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated
September 19, 2012, specifies to contact Boeing for repair
instructions, this AD requires repairing using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (p) of this AD.

Explanation of Compliance Time

    The compliance time for the replacement specified in this proposed
AD for addressing WFD was established to ensure that discrepant
structure is replaced before WFD develops in airplanes. Standard
inspection techniques cannot be relied on to detect WFD before it
becomes a hazard to flight. We will not grant any extensions of the
compliance time to complete any AD-mandated service bulletin related to
WFD unless extensive new data are provided.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 84 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
              Action                    Labor cost        Parts cost      Cost per product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection [retained actions from  Up to 50 work-hours              $0  Up to $4,250 per     Up to $357,000 per
 existing AD 2009-10-06,            x $85 per hour =                     inspection cycle.    inspection cycle
 Amendment 39-15901 (74 FR 22424,   Up to $4,250 per
 May 13, 2009)].                    inspection cycle.
Inspection [new proposed action].  259 work-hours x                  0  $22,015 per          $1,849,260 per
                                    $85 per hour =                       inspection cycle.    inspection cycle
                                    $22,015 per
                                    inspection cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
a cost estimate for the repair or modification specified in this
proposed AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We have 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 that the 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 removing airworthiness directive (AD)
2009-10-06, Amendment 39-15901 (74 FR 22424, May 13, 2009), and adding
the following new AD:

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA- 2013-0328; Directorate
Identifier 2012-NM-184-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by May 31, 2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2009-10-06, Amendment 39-15901 (74 FR
22424, May 13, 2009).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 747-400 and -400D
series airplanes; certificated in any category; as identified in
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated
September 19, 2012.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by an evaluation by the design approval
holder (DAH) indicating that certain upper chords of the upper deck
floor beam are subject to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). A
replacement was developed to support the airplane's limit of
validity (LOV) of the engineering data that support the established
structural maintenance program. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct fatigue cracking in certain upper chords of the upper deck
floor beam, which could become large and cause the floor beams to
become severed and result in rapid decompression or reduced
controllability of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Inspections and Corrective Actions With Revised Service
Information and Compliance Times

    This paragraph restates the actions required by paragraph (g) of
AD 2009-10-06, Amendment 39-15901 (74 FR 22424, May 13, 2009) with
revised service information and compliance times. Except as required
by paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of this AD: At the applicable times
in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2688, dated August 21, 2008, do an inspection (open-hole or
surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC)) to detect cracks in the
floor panel attachment fastener holes of the Section 41 upper deck
floor beam upper chords, and do applicable corrective actions, by
accomplishing all the applicable actions specified in the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2688, dated August 21, 2008; or Revision 1, dated September 19,
2012. Repeat the inspections, including the post-modification and
post-repair repetitive inspections, thereafter at the applicable
times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, dated August 21, 2008, except as
required by paragraph (i) of this AD. As of the effective date of
this AD, use only Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688,
Revision 1, dated September 19, 2012, to accomplish the actions in
this paragraph.

(h) Retained Exceptions

    (1) This paragraph restates the exception stated in paragraph
(h) of AD 2009-10-06, Amendment 39-15901 (74 FR 22424, May 13,
2009). If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2688, dated August 21, 2008; or Revision 1, dated September 19,
2012; specifies to contact Boeing for appropriate action: Before
further flight, repair the crack using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (p) of this
AD.
    (2) This paragraph restates the exception stated in paragraph
(i) of AD 2009-10-06, Amendment 39-15901 (74 FR 22424, May 13,

2009). Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, dated August
21, 2008, specifies a compliance time after the date on the service
bulletin, this AD requires compliance within the specified
compliance time after June 17, 2009 (the effective date of AD 2009-
10-06).

(i) New Compliance Time for Airplanes on Which a Repair or Modification
Is Done

    For airplanes on which a repair or modification identified in
Table 2 of 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated September 19, 2012, has been done: At
the times specified in Table 2 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated
September 19, 2012, except as required by paragraph (n)(3) of this
AD, do open-hole and surface HFEC inspections, as applicable, for
cracking, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated
September 19, 2012. Repeat at the applicable intervals specified in
Table 2 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated September 19, 2012. If any
cracking is found in the repaired or modified locations, before
further flight, repair the crack using a method approved in
accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (p) of this
AD.

(j) New Inspections and Repair

    For Group 1 airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated September 19, 2012: At the
applicable times specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated
September 19, 2012, except as specified in paragraph (n)(2) of this
AD: Do an open-hole or surface HFEC inspection to detect cracking in
the floor panel attachment fastener holes of the Section 44 upper
deck floor beam upper chords, and all applicable corrective actions,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated September 19, 2012,
except as required by paragraph (n)(1) of this AD. Repeat the
inspections thereafter at the applicable intervals specified in
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated September 19, 2012. Do all applicable
corrective actions before further flight.

(k) New Optional Terminating Modification

    Doing a hole modification or repair as a hole modification, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated September 19, 2012,
terminates the repetitive inspections specified in paragraph (j) of
this AD.

(l) New Inspection and Repair of Repaired or Modified Locations

    (1) For airplanes on which a repair or modification specified in
the ``Condition'' column of Table 4 of paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688,
Revision 1, dated September 19, 2012, has been done: At the times
specified in Table 4 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated September 19,
2012, except as required by paragraph (n)(3) of this AD, do open
hole and surface HFEC inspections, as applicable, for cracking, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated September 19, 2012.
Repeat at the applicable intervals specified in Table 4 of paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688,
Revision 1, dated September 19, 2012. If any cracking is found in
the repaired or modified locations, before further flight, repair
the crack using a method approved in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (p) of this AD.

(m) New Replacement

    At the time specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated
September 19, 2012: Replace Section 41 and 44 upper deck floor beam
upper chords, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated
September 19, 2012.

(n) New Exceptions

    (1) If any crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (i) of this AD, and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2688, Revision 1, dated September 19, 2012, specifies to contact
Boeing for appropriate action: Before further flight, repair the
crack using a method approved in accordance with the procedures
specified in paragraph (p) of this AD.
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1,
dated September 19, 2012, specifies a compliance time ``after the
Revision 1 date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires
compliance within the specified compliance time after the effective
date of this AD.
    (3) Where Table 2 or Table 4 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,''
of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-53A2688, Revision 1, dated
September 19, 2012, specifies to contact Boeing for inspections and
compliance times: Before further flight, contact the FAA for
inspections and compliance times, and accomplish the inspections at
the given times.

(o) New 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 Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747-
53A2688, dated August 21, 2008, which has not been incorporated by
reference in this AD.

(p) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (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 ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (q)(2) of the
Related Information section 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.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO to make
those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) AMOCs approved for AD 2009-10-06, Amendment 39-15901 (74 FR
22424, May 13, 2009) are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding
actions of this AD.

(q) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Roger Caldwell,
Aerospace Engineer, Technical Operations Center, ANM-100D, FAA,
Denver Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 26805 East 68th Avenue,
Room 214, Denver, CO 80249; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For information about AMOCs, contact Bill Ashforth,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle ACO,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
P. O. Box 3707, MC 2H-65, Seattle, WA 98124-2207; telephone 206-544-
5000, extension 1; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, 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 April 5, 2013.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-08904 Filed 4-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 99 (Friday, May 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29695-29696]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12472]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 3590-014]

El Dorado Hydro; El Dorado Hydro, LLC; Notice of Transfer of
Exemption

    1. By letter filed April 24, 2015,\1\ William B. Conway, Jr.,
Counsel for Enel Green Power North America, Inc. (EGPNA),\2\ informed
the Commission that the exemption from licensing for the Montgomery
Creek Project, FERC No. 3590, originally issued June 23,

1982,\3\ has been transferred to El Dorado Hydro, LLC, an affiliate of
Enel Green Power. The project is located on Montgomery Creek in Shasta
County, California. The transfer of an exemption does not require
Commission approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Seventeen other exempted projects which are to be
transferred were included in the April 24, 2015 letter. These
exemptions will be handled under separate proceedings.
    \2\ Enel Green Power North America, Inc. is a wholly owned
subsidiary of Enel Green Power. Enel Green Power is a well-
capitalized publicly traded company.
    \3\ 19 FERC ] 62,509, Order Granting Exemption from Licensing of
a Small Hydroelectric Project of 5 Megawatts or Less (1982).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. El Dorado Hydro, LLC is now the exemptee of the Montgomery Creek
Project, FERC No. 3590. All correspondence should be forwarded to: El
Dorado Hydro, LLC, c/o Enel Green Power North America, Inc., Attn:
General Counsel, 1 Tech Drive, Suite 220, Andover, MA 01810.

    Dated: May 18, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-12472 Filed 5-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P