[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 189 (Monday, October 4, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54749-54750]
[FR Doc No: 2021-21487]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-93157; File No. SR-Phlx-2021-43]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Nasdaq PHLX LLC; Order Approving a
Proposed Rule Change To Permit Monday and Wednesday Expirations for
Options Listed Pursuant to the Short Term Options Program on the
iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM)

September 28, 2021.

I. Introduction

    On August 6, 2021, Nasdaq PHLX LLC (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
amend Phlx Options 4, Section 5 at Supplementary Material .03 to permit
Monday and Wednesday expirations for options listed pursuant to the
Short Term Option Series Program (``Program'') on the iShares Russell
2000 ETF (``IWM''). The proposed rule change was published for comment
in the Federal Register on August 18, 2021.\3\ The Commission received
comment on the proposal.\4\ This order approves the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 92655 (August 12,
2021), 86 FR 46304 (``Notice'').
    \4\ Comment on the proposed rule change can be found at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-phlx-2021-43/srphlx202143.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    Under the terms of the current Program, after an option class has
been approved for listing and trading on the Exchange, the Exchange may
open for trading, on any Thursday or Friday that is a business day,
series of options on that class that expire on each of the next five
consecutive Fridays that are business days,\5\ provided that such
Friday does not occur in the same week in which monthly options series
on the same class expire or is not a Friday on which Quarterly Options
Series on the same class expire.\6\ If the Exchange is not open for
business on the Friday of the following business week, the series will
expire on the first business day immediately prior to that Friday.\7\
In addition, the Exchange may open for trading, on any Friday or Monday
that is a business day, series of options on the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust
(``SPY'') and Invesco QQQ Trust Series (``QQQ'') ETF Trust to expire on
any Monday of the month that is a business day and is not a Monday in
which Quarterly Options Series expire, provided that expirations that
are listed on a Friday must be listed at least one business week and
one business day prior to the expiration.\8\ The Exchange also may open
for trading, on any Tuesday or Wednesday that is a business day, series
of options on SPY and QQQ to expire on any Wednesday of the month that
is a business day and is not a Wednesday in which Quarterly Options
Series expire.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Supplementary Material .03 to Options 4, Section 5.
    \6\ Id.
    \7\ Id.
    \8\ Id.
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to expand the Program to permit Phlx to open
for trading, on any Monday or Friday that is a business day, series of
options on IWM that expire on any Monday of the month that is a
business day and is not

a Monday in which Quarterly Options Series on the same class expire
(``Monday IWM Expirations''). In the case of a series that is listed on
a Friday and expires on a Monday, it must be listed at least one
business week and one business day prior to that Monday expiration. If
the Monday IWM Expiration falls on a Monday that is not a business day,
the series shall expire on the first business day immediately following
that Monday.
    Similarly, the Exchange also proposes to expand the Program to
permit Phlx to open for trading, on any Tuesday or Wednesday that is a
business day, series of options on IWM to expire on any Wednesday of
the month that is a business day and is not a Wednesday in which
Quarterly Options Series on the same class expire (``Wednesday IWM
Expirations''). If the Wednesday IWM Expiration falls on a Wednesday
that is not a business day, the series shall expire on the first
business day immediately prior to that Wednesday.
    In addition, the Exchange proposes to amend Supplementary Material
.03(b) to Options 4, Section 5, to state that it may list up to five
consecutive Monday IWM Expirations at one time and up to five
consecutive Wednesday IWM Expirations at one time, and that there may
be no more than a total of five Monday IWM Expirations and no more than
a total of five Wednesday IWM Expirations.\10\ The Exchange also
proposes to amend Supplementary Material .03(b) to Options 4, Section 5
to permit Monday IWM Expirations and Wednesday IWM Expirations to
expire in the same week in which monthly options series on the same
class expire. Otherwise, Monday IWM Expirations and Wednesday IWM
Expirations will be subject to the same rules as standard Short Term
Option Series.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Exchange also proposes a non-substantive technical
change to the punctuation after the title ``Short Term Options
Series Program'' within Supplementary Material .03 to Options 4,
Section 5.
    \11\ For example, the Monday IWM Expirations and Wednesday IWM
Expirations would be subject to the same series limitations and
strike interval rules as standard Short Term Option Series. See
Notice, supra note 3, at 46305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission's Findings

    The Commission has carefully reviewed the proposed rule change and
finds that it is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the
Act.\12\ Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposal is
consistent with the requirements of Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\
which requires, among other things, that a national securities exchange
have rules designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f. In approving this proposed rule change, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule change's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One commenter expressed support for the proposal, stating that it
permits market participants ``to manage a more tailored and cost
effective hedge for a specific event date'' \14\ and asserting that the
demand for Monday and Wednesday expirations on SPY and QQQ indicates
their utility for market participants.\15\ The Commission believes that
the proposed rule change may provide the investing public and other
market participants more flexibility to closely tailor their investment
and hedging decisions in IWM options, thus allowing them to better
manage their risk exposure. The Commission notes that the proposed rule
change is also similar to the Exchange's existing rules permitting the
listing and trading of Monday and Wednesday expirations on SPY and
QQQ.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Letter from Michael Golding, Head of Trading, Optiver
US LLC, to Vanessa Countryman, Secretary, Commission, dated
September 8, 2021, at 1.
    \15\ See id., at 2.
    \16\ See Supplementary Material .03 to Options 4, Section 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In approving the proposal, the Commission notes that the Exchange
has represented that it has an adequate surveillance program in place
to detect manipulative trading in Monday IWM Expirations and Wednesday
IWM Expirations.\17\ The Exchange further states that it has the
necessary systems capacity to support the new options series.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Notice, supra note 3, at 46305-06.
    \18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered that pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act \19\ that the proposed rule change (SR-Phlx-2021-43) be, and hereby
is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.300-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-21487 Filed 10-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 205)]
[Notices]
[Page 60337]
[DOCID:fr24oc07-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP07-90-001]

Tres Palacios Gas Storage LLC; Notice of Compliance Filing

October 15, 2007.
    Take notice that on October 5, 2007, Tres Palacios Gas Storage LLC
(Tres Palacios) tendered for filing a compliance filing pursuant to the
Commission order issued on September 20, 2007 in Docket Nos. CP07-90-
000, et al. (Tres Palacios Gas Storage LLC, 120 FERC 61,253 (2007)).
    Tres Palacios states that copies of the filing were served on
parties on the official service list in the above-captioned proceeding.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing a
protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Protest Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time October 19, 2007.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-20880 Filed 10-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 241 (Friday, December 16, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77105-77106]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27242]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0374; FRL-10476-01-OMS]

Notice of Rescheduled Public Hearing Regarding Notice of Intent
To Suspend Dimethyl Tetrachloroterephthalate (DCPA) Technical
Registration

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of objections and rescheduled public hearing.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received objections
and hearing requests in response to its issuance of a Notice of Intent
to Suspend registration of a pesticide containing dimethyl
tetrachloroterephthalate (DCPA). EPA will hold a rescheduled public
hearing to receive evidence related to the proposed suspension of DCPA.

DATES: A public hearing will be held beginning at 9 a.m. ET January 24,
2023, and continue as necessary through January 27, 2023.

ADDRESSES: The public hearing will take place in the EPA Administrative
Courtroom, EPA East Building, Room 1152, 1201 Constitution Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Angeles, Headquarters Hearing
Clerk, Office of Administrative Law Judges, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Mail Code 1900R, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564-
6281; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, farm worker and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry;
pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be
interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action.

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

    The regulatory docket for this action, identified by docket
identification number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0374, is available electronically
at https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Office of
Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the EPA
Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW,
Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744.
    The adjudication docket for the proceeding in which petitioners
have requested a public hearing, captioned In re FIFRA Section
3(c)(2)(B) Notice of Intent to Suspend Dimethyl
Tetrachloroterephthalate (DCPA) Technical Registration and identified
by docket number FIFRA-HQ-2022-0002, is available electronically on the
website of EPA's Office of Administrative Law Judges at https://yosemite.epa.gov/oarm/alj/alj_web_docket.nsf/Active+Dockets?OpenView.

II. Public Hearing To Be Held on Objections to EPA's Notice of Intent
To Suspend DCPA

    EPA previously published (87 FR 25262, April 28, 2022) a Notice of
Intent to Suspend (NOITS) the registration of DCPA pursuant to its
authority under Section 3(c)(2)(B)(iv) of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), 7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(2)(B)(iv).
Section 3(c)(2)(B)(iv) of FIFRA provides that any person adversely
affected by the NOITS may request a hearing on the proposed suspension
within thirty days of the registrant receiving the notice. On May 24,
2022, the Western Plant Health Association filed an objection to the
NOITS. On May 27, 2022, AMVAC Chemical Corporation, the DCPA
registrant, filed an objection to the NOITS and requested a hearing.
Also on May 27, 2022, the Grower-Shipper Association of Central
California, Sunheaven Farms, LLC, J&D Produce, Ratto Bros., Inc., and
Huntington Farms jointly filed an objection to the NOITS and requested
a hearing.
    The hearing requests commenced a proceeding under section 6(d) of
FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136d(d), and EPA's procedural rules, 40 CFR 164, before
EPA's Office of Administrative Law Judges. Under those rules, a hearing
was previously scheduled to begin on July 6, 2022 (87 FR 37507, June
23, 2022). However, that hearing was canceled after the EPA requested
and was granted an accelerated decision. Petitioners appealed that
decision to the Environmental Appeals Board, which on September 28,
2022, issued an order remanding the case to the Office of
Administrative Law Judges. The Environmental Appeals Board directed
that a hearing be held to determine whether AMVAC failed to take
appropriate steps to secure data required by EPA to maintain DCPA's
registration and, if so, whether the existing stocks provision of the
DCPA NOITS is consistent with FIFRA.
    As set forth in DATES and ADDRESSES, this rescheduled hearing will
begin at 9 a.m. ET January 24, 2023, and continue as necessary through
January 27, 2023, in the EPA Administrative Courtroom, EPA East
Building, Room 1152, 1201 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
Anyone wishing to attend the hearing must notify Mary Angeles,
Headquarters Hearing Clerk, Office of Administrative Law Judges, by
email no later than January 13, 2023, at the email address listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. A notice of intent to attend the
hearing shall include the individual's name, email address, telephone
number, and any organization they represent. On the day of the hearing,
attendees must present government-issued identification to enter EPA
facilities, and they may be required to wear a mask and physically
distance from others in the hearing room. Attendees may face further
restrictions on entry based on the community level of COVID-19 at the
time of the hearing.
    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.; 40 CFR 164.

    Dated: December 9, 2022.
Susan Biro,
Chief Administrative Law Judge, Office of Administrative Law Judges.
[FR Doc. 2022-27242 Filed 12-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 117 (Monday, June 18, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36216-36220]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14807]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0631; Directorate Identifier 2011-SW-021-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter France Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Eurocopter France Model AS350B, AS350BA, AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3,
AS350C, AS350D, AS350D1, AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, AS355F2, AS355N, and
AS355NP helicopters with certain Aerazur emergency flotation gear
attachment brackets (brackets) installed. This proposed AD would
require an initial and recurring inspection of the brackets for a
crack, and if there is a crack, replacing the cracked bracket with an
airworthy bracket. This proposed AD is prompted by reports of cracks on
the brackets. The proposed actions are intended to prevent failure of
the emergency flotation system and loss of float stability in the event
of a water landing.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 17, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Examining the AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket
Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the
economic evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Operations Office (telephone 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
American Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie,
Texas 75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (972) 641-
3775; or at http://www.eurocopter.com/techpub. You may review the
referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,
Texas 76137.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Grigg, Manager, Safety Management
Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth,
Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to
the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might
result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed
electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
    We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as
a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, issued AD No. 2011-
0072, dated April 20, 2011 (AD 2011-0072), to correct an unsafe
condition for the Eurocopter AS350B, AS350BA, AS350BB, AS350B1,
AS350B2, AS350B3, AS350D, AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1, AS355F2, AS355N, and
AS355NP helicopters with Aerazur emergency flotation gear attachments
installed. EASA advises of several reports of cracks being found on the
brackets which appear to be caused by stress corrosion. This condition,
if not corrected, could result in ``rupture of the emergency flotation
gear attachment brackets'' during a water landing, no longer ensuring
float stability of the helicopter, possibly resulting in damage to the
helicopter and injury to the occupants. The EASA's AD requires an
initial inspection of the brackets, replacement of any brackets found
with cracks, and re-inspection of the brackets every 13 months.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
France and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with France, the EASA, its technical
representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in
its AD. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all known
relevant information and determined that an unsafe condition is likely
to exist or develop on other helicopters of these same type designs.

Related Service Information

    Eurocopter issued Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. AS350-05.00.63,
Revision 1, dated April 18, 2011 (AS350-05.00.63), and ASB No. AS355-
05.00.58, Revision 1, dated April 18, 2011 (AS355-05.00.58). These ASBs
specify procedures to inspect the front and rear brackets at regular
intervals. The EASA classified these ASBs as mandatory and issued EASA
AD 2011-0072 to ensure the continued airworthiness of these
helicopters.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require inspecting the brackets for a crack
within 110 hours time-in-service (TIS) or 3 months, whichever occurs
first and, if there is a crack, replacing the cracked bracket with an
airworthy bracket. This proposed AD would also require repeating the
inspection at intervals not to exceed 13 months.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the EASA AD

    Differences between this proposed AD and the EASA AD include:
     The EASA AD applies to Eurocopter Model AS 350 BB
helicopters; this proposed AD does not as this model is not type
certificated by the FAA. Additionally, the EASA AD excludes Eurocopter
Models AS350C and AS350D1, whereas this proposed AD includes them.
     The EASA AD mandates different compliance times depending
on the manufacture date of the helicopter; we mandate inspecting all
helicopters within 110 hours TIS or 3 months, whichever occurs first,
regardless of date of manufacture.
     This proposed AD does not require returning cracked
brackets to the manufacturer.

Interim Action

    We consider this proposed AD interim action. Eurocopter is
currently developing a modification that will address the unsafe
condition identified in this AD. Once this modification is

developed, approved, and available, we might consider additional
rulemaking.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 733 helicopters of
U.S. Registry. We estimate that operators may incur the following costs
in order to comply with this AD. It would take about 4 work-hours per
inspection cycle and the average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based
on these estimates, the total cost per inspection cycle would be $340
per helicopter and $249,220 on the U.S. fleet. Required parts for one
bracket replacement would cost about $1,130 and replacement would take
about 1 work-hour. Thus, the total cost to replace one bracket would be
about $1,215; however, we have no way of determining the number of
helicopters that might need these replacements.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed, I certify this proposed regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that
it justifies making a regulatory distinction; 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.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Eurocopter France: Docket No. FAA-2012-0631; Directorate Identifier
2011-SW-021-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Eurocopter France Model AS350B, AS350BA,
AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, AS350C, AS350D, AS350D1, AS355E, AS355F,
AS355F1, AS355F2, AS355N, and AS355NP helicopters with an Aerazur
emergency flotation gear attachment bracket, part number 158172,
158173, 158288, or 158289, installed, certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a crack in an attachment
bracket of the emergency flotation gear. This condition could result
in failure of the emergency flotation system and loss of float
stability in the event of a water landing.

(c) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(d) Required Actions

    Within 110 hours time-in-service or 3 months, whichever occurs
first, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 13 months:
    (1) Using a 5x or higher power magnifying glass, visually
inspect the front emergency floatation gear attachment bracket
(Figure 1 of this AD, section B-B, item (e)) in Areas F, G, and H;
and the rear emergency flotation gear attachment bracket (Figure 1
of this AD, section A-A, item (a)) in Areas D and E for a crack.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP18JN12.007

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C
    (2) If there is a crack, replace the cracked emergency
floatation gear attachment bracket with an airworthy emergency
floatation gear attachment bracket prior to reinstallation of the
emergency flotation equipment.

(e) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC)

    (1) The Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Jim Grigg, Manager, Safety
Management Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd.,
Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(f) Additional Information

    (1) Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. AS350-05.00.63,
Revision 1, dated April 18, 2011, and ASB No. AS355-05.00.58,
Revision 1, dated April 18, 2011, which are not incorporated by
reference, contain additional information about the subject of this
AD. For this service information, contact American Eurocopter
Corporation, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, Texas 75052;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or
at http://www.eurocopter.com/techpub. You may review this service
information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137.
    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2011-0072, dated April 20, 2011.

 (g) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 2560, Emergency
Equipment.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 8, 2012.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-14807 Filed 6-15-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: June 24, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 122)]
[Notices]
[Page 35683-35684]
[DOCID:fr24jn08-65]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings  1

June 16, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC08-102-000.
    Applicants: Dynegy Holdings Inc.; Rolling Hills Generating, LLC;
TPF II Rolling Hills, LLC.
    Description: Application of Dynegy Holdings, Inc et al. for
approval to indirectly transfer to buyers of all ownership interest in
Rolling Hills.
    Filed Date: 06/11/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080613-0022.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 02, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER01-48-010.
    Applicants: Powerex Corp.
    Description: Powerex Corp submits Substitute Original Sheet 3 to
Third Revised Rate Schedule 1.
    Filed Date: 06/12/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080613-0056.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 03, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER01-1527-011; ER01-1529-011.
    Applicants: Sierra Pacific Power Company; Nevada Power Company.
    Description: Nevada Power Co et al. submits notification of non-
material changes in status.
    Filed Date: 06/10/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080612-0012.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 01, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER04-268-008; ER06-398-005; ER06-399-005; ER07-157-
003; ER98-4159-011.
    Applicants: Duquesne Power, LLC; Duquesne Keystone, LLC; Duquesne
Conemaugh, LLC; Macquarie Cook Power Inc.; Duquesne Light Company.
    Description: Supplement to Updated Triennial Market Power Analysis
for Duquesne Light Company, et al.
    Filed Date: 06/11/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080611-5114.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 02, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-739-012; ER06-738-012; ER03-983-010; ER07-501-
008; ER02-537-014; ER07-758-006; ER08-649-003.
    Applicants: East Coast Power Linden Holding, LLC; Cogen
Technologies Linden Venture, L.P.; Fox Energy Company LLC; Birchwood
Power Partners, L.P.; Shady Hills Power Company, L.L.C.; Inland Empire
Energy Center, L.L.C.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of the GE
Companies per Order Nos. 652, and 697.
    Filed Date: 06/11/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080611-5113.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 02, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-864-010; ER07-1356-002; ER07-1112-001; ER07-
1113-001; ER07-1115-001; ER07-1116-001; ER07-1117-001; ER07-1358-002;
ER07-1118-001; ER07-1119-001; ER07-1120-001; ER07-1122-001; ER06-1543-
007; ER00-2885-017; ER01-2765-016; ER08-148-001; ER05-1232-009; ER02-
1582-014; ER02-1785-015; ER02-2102-016; ER03-1283-011.
    Applicants: Bear Energy LP; BE Alabama LLC; BE Allegheny LLC; BE CA
LLC; BE Colquitt LLC; BE Ironwood LLC; BE KJ LLC; BE Rayle LLC; BE Red
Oak LLC; BE Satilla LLC; BE Walton LLC; BE Louisiana LLC; BRUSH
COGENERATION PARTNERS; Cedar Brakes I LLC; Cedar Brakes II, LLC;
JPMorgan Ventures Energy Corporation; Mohawk River Funding IV, L.L.C.;
Thermo Cogeneration Partnership L.P.; Utility Contract Funding, L.L.C.;
Vineland Energy, LLC; CENTRAL POWER & LIME INC.
    Description: Notice on Non-Material Change in Status re Bear Energy
LP et al.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080613-5005.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 07, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1409-001; ER06-1408-001; ER05-1511-003; ER06-
1407-001; ER06-1413-001; ER08-577-002; ER08-578-002; ER08-579-002.
    Applicants: Noble Altona Windpark, LLC; Noble Ellenberg Windpark,
LLC; Noble Thumb Windpark I, LLC; Noble Bliss Windpark, LLC; Noble
Clinton Windpark I, LLC; Noble Bellmont Windpark, LLC; Noble Chateaugay
Windpark, LLC; Noble Wethersfield Windpark, LLC.
    Description: Noble Environmental LLC notifies FERC of changes in
certain characteristics upon which the Commission may have relied in
granting market-based rate authority to the Noble Project Companies.
    Filed Date: 06/12/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080613-0045.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 03, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-1332-004.
    Applicants: Smoky Hills Wind Farm, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status re Smoky Hills Wind Farm,
LLC.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080613-5010.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 07, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-357-002.
    Applicants: Fenton Power Partners I, LLC.
    Description: Supplemental to Notice of Change in Status of Fenton
Power Partners I, LLC.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080613-5063.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, June 23, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-777-001.
    Applicants: Westar Energy, Inc.
    Description: Westar Energy, Inc et al. submits Substitute 3rd
revised Sheet 172 et al. to FERC Electric Tariff, Second Revised Volume
5 under ER08-777.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080616-0085.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 07, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-796-001.
    Applicants: ITC Midwest LLC.
    Description: ITC Midwest LLC submits responses to FERC's letter
dated 5/29/08.
    Filed Date: 06/11/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080612-0204.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 02, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-889-001.

    Applicants: Carolina Power & Light Company.
    Description: Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc submits supplemental
information requested by the FERC Staff in support of original 4/30/08
filing under ER08-889.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080616-0072.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, June 23, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1098-001; ER08-1099-001; ER08-1100-001.
    Applicants: National Grid Generation LLC; National Grid-Port
Jefferson Energy Cent; National Grid-Glenwood Energy Center, LLC.
    Description: National Grid USA submits Supplements to the Notices
of Succession for KeySpan Generation LLC et al. under ER08-1098 et al.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080616-0076.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 07, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1103-000.
    Applicants: American Transmission Systems, Incorporated.
    Description: American Transmission Systems Incorporated submits a
Construction Agreement dated 5/22/08 with Cleveland Electric
Illuminating Company et al.
    Filed Date: 06/10/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080612-0014.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 01, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1104-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Arizona Public Service Co submits proposed revisions
to their FERC Electric Tariff, Volume 3.
    Filed Date: 06/10/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080612-0015.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 01, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1105-000.
    Applicants: TFS Capital LLC.
    Description: TFS Capital LLC submits a notice of cancellation of
FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 06/12/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080613-0046.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 03, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1106-000.
    Applicants: MATL LLP.
    Description: MATL LLP submits an amendments to Attachment L of
their Open Access Transmission Tariff, FERC Electric Tariff, Second
Revised Volume 1 to become effective 8/12/08 under ER08-1106.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080616-0086.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 07, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1107-000.
    Applicants: The American Electric Power Service Corp.
    Description: American Electric Power submits a second revisions to
the Interconnection and Local Delivery Service Agreement 1419 between
the Village of Carey and AEP under ER08-1107.
    Filed Date: 06/13/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080616-0075.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, July 07, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following open access
transmission tariff filings:
    Docket Numbers: OA07-36-002.
    Applicants: South Carolina Electric & Gas Company.
    Description: Attachment L Compliance Filing of South Carolina
Electric & Gas Company.
    Filed Date: 06/12/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080612-5098.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 03, 2008.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-14177 Filed 6-23-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


SSP plan that describes how it measures the success of its safety
culture identified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.

Sec.  270.105  Discovery and admission as evidence of certain
information.

    (a) Protected information. Any information compiled or collected
after August 14, 2017, solely for the purpose of planning,
implementing, or evaluating a system safety program under this part
shall not be subject to discovery, admitted into evidence, or
considered for other purposes in a Federal or State court proceedings
for damages involving personal injury, wrongful death, or property
damage. For purposes of this section--
    (1) ``Information'' includes plans, reports, documents, surveys,
schedules, lists, or data, and specifically includes a railroad's
analysis of its safety risks under Sec.  270.103(q)(1) and a railroad's
statement of mitigation measures under Sec.  270.103(q)(2); and
    (2) ``Solely'' means that a railroad originally compiled or
collected the information for the exclusive purpose of planning,
implementing, or evaluating a system safety program under this part.
Information compiled or collected for any other purpose is not
protected, even if the railroad also uses that information for a system
safety program. ``Solely'' also means that a railroad continues to use
that information only for its system safety program. If a railroad
subsequently uses for any other purpose information that was initially
compiled or collected for a system safety program, this section does
not protect that information to the extent that it is used for the non-
system safety program purpose. The use of that information within the
railroad's system safety program, however, remains protected. This
section does not protect information that is required to be compiled or
collected pursuant to any other provision of law or regulation.
    (b) Non-protected information. This section does not affect the
discovery, admissibility, or consideration for other purposes in a
Federal or State court proceedings for damages involving personal
injury, wrongful death, or property damage of information compiled or
collected for a purpose other than that specifically identified in
paragraph (a) of this section. Such information shall continue to be
discoverable, admissible, or considered for other purposes in a Federal
or State court proceedings for damages involving personal injury,
wrongful death, or property damage if it was discoverable, admissible,
or considered for other purposes in a Federal or State court
proceedings for damages involving personal injury, wrongful death, or
property damage on or before August 14, 2017. Specifically, the types
of information not affected by this section include:
    (1) Information compiled or collected on or before August 14, 2017;
    (2) Information compiled or collected on or before August 14, 2017,
and that continues to be compiled or collected, even if used to plan,
implement, or evaluate a railroad's system safety program; or
    (3) Information that is compiled or collected after August 14,
2017, and is compiled or collected for a purpose other than that
identified in paragraph (a) of this section.
    (c) Information protected by other law or regulation. Nothing in
this section shall affect or abridge in any way any other protection of
information provided by another provision of law or regulation. Any
such provision of law or regulation applies independently of the
protections provided by this section.
    (d) Preemption. To the extent that State discovery rules and
sunshine laws would require disclosure of information protected by this
section in a Federal or State court proceedings for damages involving
personal injury, wrongful death, or property damage, those rules and
laws are preempted.

Sec.  270.107   Consultation requirements.

    (a) General duty. (1) Each railroad required to establish a system
safety program under this part shall in good faith consult with, and
use its best efforts to reach agreement with, all of its directly
affected employees, including any non-profit labor organization
representing a class or craft of directly affected employees, on the
contents of the SSP plan.
    (2) A railroad that consults with such a non-profit employee labor
organization as required by paragraph (a)(1) of this section is
considered to have consulted with the directly affected employees
represented by that organization. If a railroad contracts out
significant portions of its operations, the contractor and the
contractor's employees performing the railroad's operations shall be
considered directly affected employees for the purposes of this part.
    (3) A railroad shall have a preliminary meeting with its directly
affected employees to discuss how the consultation process will
proceed. A railroad is not required to discuss the substance of a SSP
plan during this preliminary meeting. A railroad must:

    (i) Hold the preliminary meeting no later than April 10, 2017; and
    (ii) Notify the directly affected employees of the preliminary
meeting no less than 60 days before it is held.
    (4) Appendix B to this part contains non-mandatory guidance on how
a railroad may comply with the requirements of this section.
    (b) Railroad consultation statements. A railroad required to submit
a SSP plan under Sec.  270.201 must also submit, together with the
plan, a consultation statement that includes the following information:
    (1) A detailed description of the process the railroad utilized to
consult with its directly affected employees;
    (2) If the railroad could not reach agreement with its directly
affected employees on the contents of its SSP plan, identification of
any known areas of disagreement and an explanation of why it believes
agreement was not reached; and
    (3) A service list containing the name and contact information for
each international/national president of any non-profit employee labor
organization representing a class or craft of the railroad's directly
affected employees. The service list must also contain the name and
contact information for any directly affected employee who
significantly participated in the consultation process independently of
a non-profit employee labor organization. When a railroad submits its
SSP plan and consultation statement to FRA pursuant to Sec.  270.201,
it must also simultaneously send a copy of these documents to all
individuals identified in the service list.
    (c) Statements from directly affected employees. (1) If a railroad
and its directly affected employees cannot reach agreement on the
proposed contents of a SSP plan, the directly affected employees may
file a statement with the FRA Associate Administrator for Railroad
Safety and Chief Safety Officer explaining their views on the plan on
which agreement was not reached with the FRA Associate Administrator
for Railroad Safety and Chief Safety Officer at Mail Stop 25, 1200 New
Jersey Ave SE., Washington, DC 20590. The FRA Associate Administrator
for Railroad Safety and Chief Safety Officer shall consider any such
views during the plan review and approval process.
    (2) A railroad's directly affected employees have 30 days following
the date of the railroad's submission of a proposed SSP plan to submit
the statement described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
    (d) Consultation requirements for system safety program plan
amendments. A railroad's SSP plan must include a description of the
process the railroad will use to consult with its directly affected
employees on any subsequent substantive amendments to the railroad's
system safety program. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply
to non-substantive amendments (e.g., amendments that update names and
addresses of railroad personnel).

Subpart C--Review, Approval, and Retention of System Safety Program
Plans

Sec.  270.201  Filing and approval.

    (a) Filing. (1) Each railroad to which this part applies shall
submit one copy of its SSP plan to the FRA Associate Administrator for
Railroad Safety and Chief Safety Officer, Mail Stop 25, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, no later than February 8, 2018 or not
less than 90 days before commencing operations, whichever is later.
    (2) The railroad shall not include in its SSP plan the risk-based
hazard analysis conducted pursuant to Sec.  270.103(q). The railroad
shall make the results of any risk-based hazard analysis available upon
request to representatives of FRA and States participating under part
212 of this chapter.
    (3) The SSP plan shall include:
    (i) The signature, name, title, address, and telephone number of
the chief safety officer who bears primary managerial authority for
implementing the program for the submitting railroad. By signing, this
chief official is certifying that the contents of the SSP plan are
accurate and that the railroad will implement the contents of the
program as approved by FRA;
    (ii) The contact information for the primary person responsible for
managing the system safety program; and
    (iii) The contact information for the senior representatives of any
host railroad, contract operator, shared track/corridor operator or
persons utilizing or providing significant safety-related services.
    (4) As required by Sec.  270.107(b), each railroad must submit with
its SSP plan a consultation statement describing how it consulted with
its directly affected employees on the contents of its system safety
program plan. Directly affected employees may also file a statement in
accordance with Sec.  270.107(c).
    (b) Approval. (1) Within 90 days of receipt of a SSP plan, FRA will
review the SSP plan to determine if the elements prescribed in this
part are sufficiently addressed in the railroad's submission. This
review will also consider any statement submitted by directly affected
employees pursuant to Sec.  270.107(c).
    (2) FRA will notify each person identified by the railroad in Sec.
270.201(a)(3) in writing whether the proposed plan has been approved by
FRA, and, if not approved, the specific points in which the SSP plan is
deficient. FRA will also provide this notification to each individual
identified in the service list accompanying the consultation statement
required under Sec.  270.107(b).
    (3) If FRA does not approve a SSP plan, the affected railroad shall
amend the proposed plan to correct all deficiencies identified by FRA
and provide FRA with a corrected copy of the SSP plan not later than 90
days following receipt of FRA's written notice that the proposed SSP
plan was not approved.
    (4) Approval of a railroad's SSP plan under this part does not
constitute approval of the specific actions the railroad will implement
under its SSP plan pursuant to Sec.  270.103(q)(2) and shall not be
construed as establishing a Federal standard regarding those specific
actions.
    (c) Review of amendments. (1)(i) A railroad shall submit any
amendment(s) to the SSP plan to FRA not less than 60 days before the
proposed effective date of the amendment(s). The railroad shall file
the amended SSP plan with a cover letter outlining the changes made to
the original approved SSP plan by the proposed amendment(s). The cover
letter shall also describe the process the railroad used pursuant to
Sec.  270.107(d) to consult with its directly affected employees on the
amendment(s).
    (ii) If an amendment is safety-critical and the railroad is unable
to submit the amended SSP plan to FRA 60 days before the proposed
effective date of the amendment, the railroad shall submit the amended
SSP plan with a cover letter outlining the changes made to the original
approved SSP plan by the proposed amendment(s) and why the amendment is
safety-critical to FRA as near as possible to 60 days before the
proposed effective date of the amendment(s).
    (iii) If the proposed amendment is limited to adding or changing a
name, title, address, or telephone number of a person, FRA approval is
not required under the process in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii) of this
section, although the railroad shall still file the proposed amendment
with FRA's Associate

Administrator for Railroad Safety and Chief Safety Officer. These
proposed amendments may be implemented by the railroad upon filing with
FRA. All other proposed amendments must comply with the formal approval
process in paragraph (c) of this section.
    (2)(i) Except as provided in paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this section,
FRA will review the proposed amended SSP plan within 45 days of
receipt. FRA will then notify the primary contact person of each
affected railroad whether the proposed amended plan has been approved
by FRA, and if not approved, the specific points in which each proposed
amendment to the SSP plan is deficient.
    (ii) If FRA has not notified the railroad by the proposed effective
date of the amendment(s) whether the proposed amended plan has been
approved or not, the railroad may implement the amendment(s) pending
FRA's decision.
    (iii) If a proposed SSP plan amendment is not approved by FRA, no
later than 60 days following the receipt of FRA's written notice, the
railroad shall provide FRA either a corrected copy of the amendment
that addresses all deficiencies noted by FRA or written notice that the
railroad is retracting the amendment.
    (d) Reopened review. Following initial approval of a plan, or
amendment, FRA may reopen consideration of the plan or amendment for
cause stated.
    (e) Electronic submission. All documents required to be submitted
to FRA under this part may be submitted electronically. Appendix C to
this part provides instructions on electronic submission of documents.

Sec.  270.203  Retention of system safety program plan.

    Each railroad to which this part applies shall retain at its system
headquarters, and at any division headquarters, one copy of the SSP
plan required by this part and one copy of each subsequent amendment to
that plan. These records shall be made available to representatives of
FRA and States participating under part 212 of this chapter for
inspection and copying during normal business hours.

Subpart D--System Safety Program Internal Assessments and External
Auditing

Sec.  270.301  General.

    The system safety program and its implementation shall be assessed
internally by the railroad and audited externally by FRA or FRA's
designee.

Sec.  270.303  Internal system safety program assessment.

    (a) Following FRA's initial approval of the railroad's SSP plan
pursuant to Sec.  270.201, the railroad shall annually conduct an
assessment of the extent to which:
    (1) The system safety program is fully implemented;
    (2) The railroad is in compliance with the implemented elements of
the approved system safety program; and
    (3) The railroad has achieved the goals set forth in Sec.
270.103(c).
    (b) As part of its SSP plan, the railroad shall set forth a
statement describing the processes used to:
    (1) Conduct internal system safety program assessments;
    (2) Internally report the findings of the internal system safety
program assessments;
    (3) Develop, track, and review recommendations as a result of the
internal system safety program assessments;
    (4) Develop improvement plans based on the internal system safety
program assessments. Improvement plans shall, at a minimum, identify
who is responsible for carrying out the necessary tasks to address
assessment findings and specify a schedule of target dates with
milestones to implement the improvements that address the assessment
findings; and
    (5) Manage revisions and updates to the SSP plan based on the
internal system safety program assessments.
    (c)(1) Within 60 days of completing its internal SSP plan
assessment pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section, the railroad
shall:
    (i) Submit to FRA a copy of the railroad's internal assessment
report that includes a system safety program assessment and the status
of internal assessment findings and improvement plans to the FRA
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety and Chief Safety Officer,
Mail Stop 25, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590; and
    (ii) Outline the specific improvement plans for achieving full
implementation of the SSP plan, as well as achieving the goals of the
plan.
    (2) The railroad's chief official responsible for safety shall
certify the results of the railroad's internal SSP plan assessment.

Sec.  270.305  External safety audit.

    (a) FRA may conduct, or cause to be conducted, external audits of a
railroad's system safety program. Each audit will evaluate the
railroad's compliance with the elements required by this part in the
railroad's approved SSP plan. FRA shall provide the railroad written
notification of the results of any audit.
    (b)(1) Within 60 days of FRA's written notification of the results
of the audit, the railroad shall submit to FRA for approval an
improvement plan to address the audit findings that require corrective
action. At a minimum, the improvement plan shall identify who is
responsible for carrying out the necessary tasks to address audit
findings and specify target dates and milestones to implement the
improvements that address the audit findings.
    (2) If FRA does not approve the railroad's improvement plan, FRA
will notify the railroad of the specific deficiencies in the
improvement plan. The affected railroad shall amend the proposed plan
to correct the deficiencies identified by FRA and provide FRA with a
corrected copy of the improvement plan no later than 30 days following
its receipt of FRA's written notice that the proposed plan was not
approved.
    (3) Upon request, the railroad shall provide to FRA and States
participating under part 212 of this chapter for review a report upon
request regarding the status of the implementation of the improvements
set forth in the improvement plan established pursuant to paragraph
(b)(1) of this section.

Appendix A to Part 270--Schedule of Civil Penalties

                          Penalty Schedule \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Willful
                                             Violation       violation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Subpart B--System Safety Program Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
270.101--System safety program; general:
    (a) Failure to establish a system            $15,000         $30,000
     safety program.....................
    (a) Failure to include a risk-based           10,000          20,000
     hazard management program in the
     railroad's system safety program...
270.103--System safety program plan:

    (a)(1) Failure to include and comply           7,500          15,000
     with any required element or any
     sub-element in the SSP plan........
    (a)(2) Failure to communicate and              7,500          15,000
     coordinate with host railroad on
     the SSP plan.......................
270.107--Consultation Requirements:
    (a)(1) Failure to consult with                10,000          20,000
     directly affected employees........
    Failure to consult in good faith and/         10,000          20,000
     or use best efforts................
    (a)(3) Failure to hold preliminary             7,500          15,000
     meeting............................
    Failure to hold preliminary meeting            5,000          10,000
     within April 10, 2017..............
    Failure to notify directly affected            7,500          15,000
     employees no less than 60 days
     before meeting is held.............
    (b) Failure to submit consultation             7,500          15,000
     statement with plan submission.....
    Failure to include all required                5,000          10,000
     elements in consultation statement.
    (d) Failure to submit consultation             5,000          10,000
     statement with submission of plan
     amendment..........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Subpart C--Review, Approval, and Retention of SSP Plans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
270.201--Filing and approval:
    (a)(1) Failure to file an initial             10,000          20,000
     SSP plan...........................
    Failure to file a SSP plan within 90          10,000          20,000
     days of commencing operations......
    (a)(3) Failure to include all                  5,000          10,000
     required information in submission.
    (b)(3) Failure to correct identified           7,500          15,000
     deficiencies and amend SSP plan....
    Failure to submit amended SSP plan..           7,500          15,000
    Failure to submit amended SSP plan             5,000          10,000
     within 90 days.....................
    (c)(1)(i) Failure to submit                    7,500          15,000
     amendment to SSP plan..............
    Failure to submit amendment to SSP             5,000          10,000
     plan within 60 days................
    (c)(2)(iii) Failure to submit                  7,500          15,000
     corrected amendment or notify FRA
     of retraction......................
    Failure to submit corrected                    5,000          10,000
     amendment within 60 days...........
270.203--Retention of SSP plan:
    Failure to retain a copy of the SSP           10,000          20,000
     plan at the system/division
     headquarters.......................
    Failure to make records available to           7,500          15,000
     representatives of FRA and States
     participating under part 212 of
     this chapter.......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Subpart D--System Safety Program Internal Assessments and External
                                Auditing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
270.303--Internal program assessment:
    (a) Failure to conduct an annual              10,000          20,000
     internal assessment................
    Failure to include all required                7,500          15,000
     elements in the internal assessment
    (b) Failure to include a statement             5,000          10,000
     in the SSP plan describing the
     required elements..................
    (c)(1)(i) Failure to submit to FRA             7,500          15,000
     the internal assessment report.....
    Failure for the internal assessment            5,000          10,000
     report to contain all required
     elements and sub-elements..........
    (c)(1)(ii) Failure to develop and              7,500          15,000
     outline improvement plans..........
    Failure to comply with improvement             7,500          15,000
     plans..............................
    (c)(2) Failure of chief official               5,000          10,000
     responsible for safety to certify
     the results of the internal
     assessment.........................
270.305--External safety audit:
    (b)(1) Failure to submit improvement           7,500          15,000
     plans..............................
    Failure to submit improvement plans            5,000          10,000
     within 60 days.....................
    Failure to include all required                5,000          10,000
     elements in the improvement plans..
    (b)(2) Failure to amend and submit             7,500          15,000
     to FRA the improvement plan........
    Failure to submit amended                      5,000          10,000
     improvement plan within 30 days....
    (b)(3) Failure to provide a report             7,500          15,000
     regarding the status of the
     implementation of the improvements
     set forth in the improvement plan..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A penalty may be assessed against an individual only for a willful
  violation. The Administrator reserves the right to assess a penalty of
  up to $109,819 for any violation where circumstances warrant. See 49
  CFR part 209, appendix A.

Appendix B to Part 270--Federal Railroad Administration Guidance on the
System Safety Program Consultation Process

    A railroad required to develop a system safety program under
this part must in good faith consult with and use its best efforts
to reach agreement with its directly affected employees on the
contents of the SSP plan. See Sec.  270.107(a). This appendix
discusses the meaning of the terms ``good faith'' and ``best
efforts,'' and provides non-mandatory guidance on how a railroad may
comply with the requirement to consult with directly affected
employees on the contents of its SSP plan. Guidance is provided for
employees who are represented by a non-profit employee labor
organization and employees who are not represented by any such
organization.

The Meaning of ``Good Faith'' and ``Best Efforts''

    ``Good faith'' and ``best efforts'' are not interchangeable
terms representing a vague standard for the Sec.  270.107
consultation process. Rather, each term has a specific and distinct
meaning. When consulting with directly affected employees,
therefore, a railroad must independently meet the standards for both
the good faith and best efforts obligations. A railroad that does
not meet the standard for one or the other will not be in compliance
with the consultation requirements of Sec.  270.107.
    The good faith obligation requires a railroad to consult with
employees in a manner that is honest, fair, and reasonable, and to
genuinely pursue agreement on the contents of a SSP plan. If a
railroad consults with its employees merely in a perfunctory manner,
without genuinely pursuing agreement, it will not have met the good
faith requirement. For example, a lack of good faith may be found if
a railroad's directly affected employees express concerns with
certain parts of the railroad's SSP plan, and the railroad neither
addresses those concerns in further consultation nor attempts to
address those concerns by making changes to the SSP plan.
    On the other hand, ``best efforts'' establishes a higher
standard than that

imposed by the good faith obligation, and describes the diligent
attempts that a railroad must pursue to reach agreement with its
employees on the contents of its system safety program. While the
good faith obligation is concerned with the railroad's state of mind
during the consultation process, the best efforts obligation is
concerned with the specific efforts made by the railroad in an
attempt to reach agreement. This would include considerations such
as whether a railroad had held sufficient meetings with its
employees to address or make an attempt to address any concerns
raised by the employees, or whether the railroad had made an effort
to respond to feedback provided by employees during the consultation
process. For example, a railroad would not meet the best efforts
obligation if it did not initiate the consultation process in a
timely manner, and thereby failed to provide employees sufficient
time to engage in the consultation process. A railroad may, however,
wish to hold off substantive consultations regarding the contents of
its SSP until one year after the publication date of the rule to
ensure that certain information generated as part of the process is
protected from discovery and admissibility into evidence under Sec.
270.105 of the rule. Generally, best efforts are measured by the
measures that a reasonable person in the same circumstances and of
the same nature as the acting party would take. Therefore, the
standard imposed by the best efforts obligation may vary with
different railroads, depending on a railroad's size, resources, and
number of employees.
    When reviewing SSP plans, FRA will determine on a case-by-case
basis whether a railroad has met its Sec.  270.107 good faith and
best efforts obligations. This determination will be based upon the
consultation statement submitted by the railroad pursuant to Sec.
270.107(b) and any statements submitted by employees pursuant to
Sec.  270.107(c). If FRA finds that these statements do not provide
sufficient information to determine whether a railroad used good
faith and best efforts to reach agreement, FRA may investigate
further and contact the railroad or its employees to request
additional information. If FRA determines that a railroad did not
use good faith and best efforts, FRA may disapprove the SSP plan
submitted by the railroad and direct the railroad to comply with the
consultation requirements of Sec.  270.107. Pursuant to Sec.
270.201(b)(3), if FRA does not approve the SSP plan, the railroad
will have 90 days, following receipt of FRA's written notice that
the plan was not approved, to correct any deficiency identified. In
such cases, the identified deficiency would be that the railroad did
not use good faith and best efforts to consult and reach agreement
with its directly affected employees. If a railroad then does not
submit to FRA within 90 days a SSP plan meeting the consultation
requirements of Sec.  270.107, the railroad could be subject to
penalties for failure to comply with Sec.  270.201(b)(3).

Guidance on How a Railroad May Consult With Directly Affected Employees

    Because the standard imposed by the best efforts obligation will
vary depending upon the railroad, there may be countless ways for
various railroads to comply with the consultation requirements of
Sec.  270.107. Therefore, FRA believes it is important to maintain a
flexible approach to the Sec.  270.107 consultation requirements, to
give a railroad and its directly affected employees the freedom to
consult in a manner best suited to their specific circumstances.
    FRA is nevertheless providing guidance in this appendix as to
how a railroad may proceed when consulting (utilizing good faith and
best efforts) with employees in an attempt to reach agreement on the
contents of a SSP plan. FRA believes this guidance may be useful as
a starting point for railroads that are uncertain about how to
comply with the Sec.  270.107 consultation requirements. This
guidance distinguishes between employees who are represented by a
non-profit employee labor organization and employees who are not, as
the processes a railroad may use to consult with represented and
non-represented employees could differ significantly.
    This guidance does not establish prescriptive requirements with
which a railroad must comply, but merely outlines a consultation
process a railroad may choose to follow. A railroad's consultation
statement could indicate that the railroad followed the guidance in
this appendix as evidence that it utilized good faith and best
efforts to reach agreement with its employees on the contents of a
SSP plan.

Employees Represented by a Non-Profit Employee Labor Organization

    As provided in Sec.  270.107(a)(2), a railroad consulting with
the representatives of a non-profit employee labor organization on
the contents of a SSP plan will be considered to have consulted with
the directly affected employees represented by that organization.
    A railroad may utilize the following process as a roadmap for
using good faith and best efforts when consulting with represented
employees in an attempt to reach agreement on the contents of a SSP
plan.
     Pursuant to Sec.  270.107(a)(3)(i), a railroad must
meet with representatives from a non-profit employee labor
organization (representing a class or craft of the railroad's
directly affected employees) no later than April 10, 2017, to begin
the process of consulting on the contents of the railroad's SSP
plan. A railroad must provide notice at least 60 days before the
scheduled meeting.
     During the time between the initial meeting and the
applicability date of Sec.  270.105 the parties may meet to discuss
administrative details of the consultation process as necessary.
     Within 60 days after the applicability date of Sec.
270.105 a railroad should have a meeting with the directed affected
employees to discuss substantive issues with the SSP.
     Pursuant to Sec.  270.201(a)(1), a railroad would file
its SSP plan with FRA no later than February 8, 2018, or not less
than 90 days before commencing operations, whichever is later.
     As provided by Sec.  270.107(c), if agreement on the
contents of a SSP plan could not be reached, a labor organization
(representing a class or craft of the railroad's directly affected
employees) may file a statement with the FRA Associate Administrator
for Railroad Safety and Chief Safety Officer explaining its views on
the plan on which agreement was not reached.

Employees Who Are Not Represented by a Non-Profit Employee Labor
Organization

    FRA recognizes that some (or all) of a railroad's directly
affected employees may not be represented by a non-profit employee
labor organization. For such non-represented employees, the
consultation process described for represented employees may not be
appropriate or sufficient. For example, FRA believes that a railroad
with non-represented employees should make a concerted effort to
ensure that its non-represented employees are aware that they are
able to participate in the development of the railroad's SSP plan.
FRA therefore is providing the following guidance regarding how a
railroad may utilize good faith and best efforts when consulting
with non-represented employees on the contents of its SSP plan.
     By December 12, 2016 (i.e., within 60 days of the
effective date of the final rule), a railroad may notify non-
represented employees that--
    (1) The railroad is required to consult in good faith with, and
use its best efforts to reach agreement with, all directly affected
employees on the proposed contents of its SSP plan;
    (2) The railroad is required to meet with its directly affected
employees within 180 days of the effective date of the final rule to
address the consultation process;
    (3) Non-represented employees are invited to participate in the
consultation process (and include instructions on how to engage in
this process); and
    (4) If a railroad is unable to reach agreement with its directly
affected employees on the contents of the proposed SSP plan, an
employee may file a statement with the FRA Associate Administrator
for Railroad Safety and Chief Safety Officer explaining his or her
views on the plan on which agreement was not reached.
     This initial notification (and all subsequent
communications, as necessary or appropriate) could be provided to
non-represented employees in the following ways:
    (1) Electronically, such as by email or an announcement on the
railroad's Web site;
    (2) By posting the notification in a location easily accessible
and visible to non-represented employees; or
    (3) By providing all non-represented employees a hard copy of
the notification. A railroad could use any or all of these methods
of communication, so long as the notification complies with the
railroad's obligation to utilize best efforts in the consultation
process.
     Following the initial notification and initial meeting
to discuss the consultation process (and before the railroad submits
its SSP plan to FRA), a railroad should provide non-represented
employees a draft proposal of its SSP plan. This draft proposal
should solicit additional input from non-represented employees, and
the railroad should provide

non-represented employees 60 days to submit comments to the railroad
on the draft.
     Following this 60-day comment period and any changes to
the draft SSP plan made as a result, the railroad should submit the
proposed SSP plan to FRA, as required by this part.
     As provided by Sec.  270.107(c), if agreement on the
contents of a SSP plan cannot be reached, then a non-represented
employee may file a statement with the FRA Associate Administrator
for Railroad Safety and Chief Safety Officer explaining his or her
views on the plan on which agreement was not reached.

Appendix C to Part 270--Procedures for Submission of SSP Plans and
Statements From Directly Affected Employees

    This appendix establishes procedures for the submission of a
railroad's SSP plan and statements by directly affected employees
consistent with the requirements of this part.

Submission by a Railroad and Directly Affected Employees

    As provided for in Sec.  270.101, a system safety program shall
be fully implemented and supported by a written SSP plan. Each
railroad must submit its SSP plan to FRA for approval as provided
for in Sec.  270.201.
    As provided for in Sec.  270.107(c), if a railroad and its
directly affected employees cannot come to agreement on the proposed
contents of the railroad's SSP plan, the directly affected employees
have 30 days following the railroad's submission of its proposed SSP
plan to submit a statement to the FRA Associate Administrator for
Railroad Safety and Chief Safety Officer explaining the directly
affected employees' views on the plan on which agreement was not
reached.
    The railroad's and directly affected employees' submissions
shall be sent to the FRA Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety
and Chief Safety Officer, Mail Stop 25, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. When a railroad submits its SSP plan and
consultation statement to FRA pursuant to Sec.  270.201, it must
also simultaneously send a copy of these documents to all
individuals identified in the service list pursuant to Sec.
270.107(b)(3).
    Each railroad and directly affected employee is authorized to
file by electronic means any submissions required under this part.
Before any person submitting anything electronically, the person
shall provide the FRA Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety
and Chief Safety Officer with the following information in writing:
    (1) The name of the railroad or directly affected employee(s);
    (2) The names of two individuals, including job titles, who will
be the railroad's or directly affected employees' points of contact
and will be the only individuals allowed access to FRA's secure
document submission site;
    (3) The mailing addresses for the railroad's or directly
affected employees' points of contact;
    (4) The railroad's system or main headquarters address located
in the United States;
    (5) The email addresses for the railroad's or directly affected
employees' points of contact; and
    (6) The daytime telephone numbers for the railroad's or directly
affected employees' points of contact.
    A request for electronic submission or FRA review of written
materials shall be addressed to the FRA Associate Administrator for
Railroad Safety and Chief Safety Officer, Mail Stop 25, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Upon receipt of a request
for electronic submission that contains the information listed
above, FRA will then contact the requestor with instructions for
electronically submitting its program or statement. A railroad that
electronically submits an initial SSP plan or new portions or
revisions to an approved program required by this part shall be
considered to have provided its consent to receive approval or
disapproval notices from FRA by email. FRA may electronically store
any materials required by this part regardless of whether the
railroad that submits the materials does so by delivering the
written materials to the Associate Administrator and opts not to
submit the materials electronically. A railroad that opts not to
submit the materials required by this part electronically, but
provides one or more email addresses in its submission, shall be
considered to have provided its consent to receive approval or
disapproval notices from FRA by email or mail.

    Issued in Washington, DC, pursuant to the authority delegated
under 49 CFR 1.89(b).
Sarah E. Feinberg,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-18301 Filed 8-11-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 149 (Friday, August 4, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51810-51811]
[FR Doc No: 2023-16631]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP23-200-000]

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC; Northern Natural Gas
Company; Notice of Schedule for the Preparation of an Environmental
Assessment for the Pelto Area Abandonment Project

    On April 20, 2023, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC
(Transco) and Northern Natural Gas Company (Northern) filed an
application in Docket No. CP23-200-000 requesting an Authorization
pursuant to section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act to abandon certain
natural gas pipeline facilities. The facilities proposed for
abandonment have not been utilized since at least 2020 and Transco and
Northern do not anticipate that any additional flow through these
facilities will occur in the future. The proposed project is known as
the Pelto Area Abandonment Project (Project).
    On May 3, 2023, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission or FERC) issued its Notice of Application for the Project.
Among other things, that notice alerted agencies issuing federal
authorizations of the requirement to complete all necessary reviews and
to reach a final decision on a request for a federal authorization
within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's
environmental document for the Project.
    This notice identifies Commission staff's intention to prepare an
environmental assessment (EA) for the Project and the planned schedule
for the completion of the environmental review.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 40 CFR 1501.10 (2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Schedule for Environmental Review

Issuance of EA December 1, 2023
90-day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline \2\ February 29, 2024
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission's deadline applies to the decisions of other
federal agencies, and state agencies acting under federally
delegated authority, that are responsible for federal
authorizations, permits, and other approvals necessary for proposed
projects under the Natural Gas Act. Per 18 CFR 157.22(a), the
Commission's deadline for other agency's decisions applies unless a
schedule is otherwise established by federal law.

    If a schedule change becomes necessary, additional notice will be
provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the
Project's progress.

Project Description

    Transco and Northern seek to abandon six pipeline segments with
different ownership interests that total about 32.1 miles. Project
pipelines in federal waters are within a Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management (BOEM) identified Significant Sediment Resource Area and
BOEM requires that Transco and Northern remove those pipelines as part
of the proposed abandonment. Similarly, the Louisiana Office of State
Lands requires removal of abandoned pipelines within state waters.
Transco and Northern propose to abandon by removal a total of 26.5
miles of pipeline in federal waters and abandon by removal a total of
5.6 miles of pipeline within Louisiana state waters. Transco and
Northern also propose to abandon the pipeline in-place at active
foreign pipeline crossings for a total of approximately 0.20 to 0.41
mile. Additionally, Transco proposes to abandon risers in place from
the PL-10 and PL-11 Platforms, abandon risers by removal from the SS-70
Platform, and remove metering and associated equipment from the PL-10,
PL-11, and SS-91 Platforms in federal waters.

Background

    On June 14, 2023, the Commission issued a Notice of Scoping Period
Requesting Comments on Environmental Issues for the Proposed Pelto Area
Abandonment Project (Notice of Scoping). The Notice of Scoping was sent
to federal and state government agencies and other interested parties.
In response to the Notice of Scoping, the Commission received comments
from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Choctaw Nation of
Oklahoma. The primary issues raised by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency are air quality, noise, and environmental justice.
The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma stated that the Project lies outside of
its area of historic interest. All substantive comments will be
addressed in the EA.

Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to
keep track of formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets, the
Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This service
provides automatic notification of filings made to subscribed dockets,
document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/overview to register for eSubscription.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].
    Additional information about the Project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov). Using the ``eLibrary'' link, select
``General Search'' from the eLibrary menu, enter the selected date
range and ``Docket Number'' (i.e., CP23-200-000), and follow the
instructions. For assistance with access to eLibrary, the helpline can
be reached at<PHONE_NUMBER>, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at
[email protected]. The eLibrary link on the FERC

website also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by
the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule makings.

    Dated: July 28, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-16631 Filed 8-3-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P