 List of Documents Included in Docket EPA-R09-OAR-2018-0744 for Proposed Rule
           Air Plan Approval; Hawaii; Regional Haze Progress Report

Docket Index Table of Contents
A. U.S. EPA Guidance Documents, Policies, and Rulemakings
B. State Plans, Rules, Support Documents, Reports, and Correspondence

 EPA Policy, Guidance, Rulemaking Documents, and Correspondence
   Note: Federal Register notices published 1994 and after are readily available online at www.govinfo.gov. Links to individual notices are included in this index below.
    Regional Haze Regulations; Final rule. 64 FR 35714 (July 1, 1999).
    Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Control Requirements; Final Rule. 65 FR 6698 (February 10, 2000).
    Control of Air Pollution From New Motor Vehicles: Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements; Final Rule. 66 FR 5002 (January 18, 2001).
    Control of Emissions of Air Pollution From Nonroad Diesel Engines and Fuel; Final rule. 69 FR 38958 (June 29, 2004).
    Regional Haze Regulations and Guidelines for Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Determinations; Final Rule. 70 FR 39103 (July 6, 2005).
    Regional Haze Regulations; Revisions to Provisions Governing Alternative to Source-Specific Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Determinations; Final Rule. 71 FR 60611 (October 13, 2006).
    Technical Support Document for the Proposed Action on the Federal Implementation Plan for the Regional Haze Program in the State of Hawaii, U.S. EPA Region 9, May 14, 2012.
    Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plan; Hawaii; Regional Haze Federal Implementation Plan, Proposed rule. 77 FR 31692 (May 29, 2012).
    Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plan; Hawaii; Regional Haze Federal Implementation Plan; Final rule. 77 FR 61478 (October 9, 2012).
    Protection of Visibility: Amendments to Requirements for State Plans; Final Rule. 82 FR 3078 (January 10, 2017).
    EPA gasoline sulfur standards web page: https://www.epa.gov/gasoline-standards/gasoline-sulfur
B. State Plans, Rules, Support Documents, Reports, and Correspondence
Letter dated October 20, 2017 from Virginia Pressler, M.D., Director of Health, Hawaii DOH, to Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, with enclosures:
       5-Year Regional Haze Progress Report for Federal Implementation Plan, submitted October 20, 2017, with Appendices.
Letter dated November 15, 2018, from Bruce S. Anderson, Ph.D., Hawaii DOH, to Mr. Michael Stoker, Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region 9, with enclosure.
       Hawaii State Department of Health Support Documents for 5-Year Regional Haze Progress Report, November 2018.
Electronic mail dated May 12, 2017, from Michael Madsen, Hawaii DOH, to Susan Johnson and Patricia Brewer, National Park Service.
Letter dated July 6, 2017, from Patricia Brewer, National Park Service, to Michael Madsen, Hawaii DOH.


EPA Smart Growth & Active Aging National Recognition Program DCTM_ ARP. doc 1 EPA National Community Recognition Program Validation of Beta Application Thank you very much for contributing your expertise and time to assist the EPA in creating this national recognition program for communities who are creating smart growth initiatives that also specifically enhance the health and well being of older Americans.

The purpose of the beta testing process is to establish content validity of the project questions and gather feedback for question revision through rankings by content area experts in smart growth and active aging, local/ county/ state officials, and others representing potential applicants to the recognition program. We also want to assess the ease of completing the on line instrument.

Instructions:

Please read the introductory section containing the definitions of the smart growth and active aging/ physical activity programming of interest, and the descriptions of the process and program levels. Applicants will also be asked to acknowledge their review of accompanying documents regarding specific components of smart growth policy, and the participation of a local aging services official in completion of the recognition program application.

Read each statement beginning on page 3 for items 1A through 5D and rate each on a scale of 1  10 as to how well it reflects the content described in the process and program definitions provided below. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO COMPLETE THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROGRAM ITSELF, ONLY THE SECTION REGARDING HOW WELL THE ITEM ASSESSES THE CONTENT REGARDING SMART GROWTH ( SG) and/ or PHYSICAL ACTIVITY ( PA). WE WANT TO DETERMINE IF THE ITEM IS CLEAR AND UNDERSTANDABLE TO YOU. Questions for you to complete are in red and bold type. Regardless of your rating, we encourage you to suggest any revision that would clarify the content of the item.

Introduction Definitions:

* Smart Growth ( SG): Smart Growth is defined as community development that serves the environment, community, economy, and public health. The principles of smart growth include: 1) Mix land use; 2) Take advantage of compact building design; 3) Create a range of housing opportunities and choices; 4) Create walkable neighborhoods; 5) Foster distinctive, attractive neighborhoods with a sense of place; 6) Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical resources; 7) Strengthen and direct development towards existing communities; 8) Provide a variety of transportation choices; 9) Make development decisions predictable, fair, and cost effective; 10) Encourage community stakeholders collaboration in development decisions.

To be completed by applicant:

I have reviewed the accompanying policy and activity components that are integral to the smart growth principles above, and understand that they should form the basis for our community's responses to the application items for the Smart Growth and Active. Aging National Recognition Program. EPA Smart Growth & Active Aging National Recognition Program DCTM_ ARP. doc 2 * Active Aging/ Physical Activity ( PA): includes planning and implementing a variety of widely accessible programs and/ or self directed opportunities for those 60+ and which emphasize activities that increase endurance, strength, flexibility, balance, and the principles of injury prevention. These types of activities include walking, biking, fitness trails and similar activities/ programs at various levels of intensity to fit the capacities of participants. * This section will include additional resource links * Community assessment or survey: can include formal needs assessment or community survey or discussion of community needs with service providers with smart growth or active aging/ physical activity programming or opportunities in the community. * This section will include additional resource links * Denotes information link to definitions, examples, weblinks, etc Description of process and program levels:

Process I: Awareness of and general commitment to basic smart growth principles and active aging/ physical activity programs and opportunities.

Process II: Awareness of smart growth and active aging/ physical activity principles, applications and implementation strategies formulated with attention to linking smart growth and active aging/ physical activity programs and opportunities in the community.

Process III: Well established processes combining smart growth and active aging with coherent framework and broad smart growth and aging network community participation Well conceived and funded strategic attention to smart growth principles and active aging programs and opportunities; ability to mentor or serve as model for other communities. Processes are scalable, sustainable, and sharable,

Program I: Actively engaged in formulating pilot programs and activities combining smart growth and active aging.

Program II: Established/ expanding programs combining smart growth and active aging; engagement of broader segments of the community in program activity; active promotion of the program on a community basis.

Program III: Ongoing/ expanding programs on a wide community basis that are effectively applying principles of smart growth and active aging; wide community involvement of multiple sectors within the community; program funding sources established; ability to mentor or EPA Smart Growth & Active Aging National Recognition Program DCTM_ ARP. doc 3 serve as a model program for other communities. Programs are scalable, sustainable, and sharable.

BETA Items Level1 1 A: SG Process I: Our community has defined goals or a mission for advancing or applying * smart growth principles.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially completed

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Process I:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: __ 8___ Suggestions for revision:

1 B: SG Process I: Our community has conducted a * community assessment, survey or other planning activity for applying * smart growth principles.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially completed

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Process I:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: __ 8___ Suggestions for revision: EPA Smart Growth & Active Aging National Recognition Program DCTM_ ARP. doc 4 1 C: PA Process I: Our community has defined goals or a mission for increasing older adult participation in * active aging/ physical activity.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially completed

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Process I:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: __ 8___ Suggestions for revision:

1 D: PA: Process I: Our community has conducted a * community assessment or survey, or reviewed information/ data for increasing older adult participation in active aging/ physical activity.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially completed

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Process I:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: __ 8___ Suggestions for revision: EPA Smart Growth & Active Aging National Recognition Program DCTM_ ARP. doc 5 Level 2 2 A: SG: Process II: Our community's strategic development plan includes aspects of feasibility, cost, impact, time frame and leadership for applying smart growth principles.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially completed

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Process II:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: __ 6___ Suggestions for revision: It would seem that this may also or better apply to Program II 2 B: SG: Process II: Our community is actively engaged in formulating plans and strategies for specifically linking smart growth initiatives with programs, amenities or opportunities that include active aging/ physical activity for older adults

Not at all

Just starting

Partially completed

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Process II:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: ___ 7___ Suggestions for revision: It appears to address aspects of Process II. If the intent of the survey is to determine if smart growth and active aging are tied together, then it makes sense, if it is trying to gauge the level of smart growth and/ or active aging processes and/ or programs utilized by a particular jurisdiction, then the question would seem to need to be split.

2 C: PA: Process II: EPA Smart Growth & Active Aging National Recognition Program DCTM_ ARP. doc 6 Our community has a broad based planning process that includes feasibility, cost, impact, time frame and leadership for creating/ promoting active aging/ physical activity for aging adults.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially complete

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Process II:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: ___ 9__ Suggestions for revision: stays focused on active aging only 2 D: PA: Process II: Our community has established interagency committees, task forces, or other community partnerships with local aging organizations, service providers, and agencies as a means of coordinating activities and programs with smart growth and active aging/ physical activity components.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially complete

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Process II:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: ___ 4__ Suggestions for revision: If the jurisdiction has one and not the other, how do you answer this? Would seem to better serve as two questions Level 3 3 A: SG & PA: Process III: EPA Smart Growth & Active Aging National Recognition Program DCTM_ ARP. doc 7 Our community's comprehensive planning integrates smart growth principles and promotes application of these to encompass active aging/ physical activity programs and opportunities for older adults.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially complete

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Process III:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: __ 4___ Suggestions for revision: Two Questions 3 B: SG: Program I: Our community has legislative, zoning, comprehensive plan initiatives and other policies in place or in consideration that include provision for both smart growth and active aging/ physical activity programs or opportunities for older adults.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially complete

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Program I:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: __ 3___ Suggestions for revision: and/ or other policies? Two questions again   is this intended ?

3 C: PA: Program I: Our community has created pilot programs, or has existing programs for active aging/ physical activity for older adults which take advantage of the resources and EPA Smart Growth & Active Aging National Recognition Program DCTM_ ARP. doc 8 environments created by local smart growth activities such as safe walking area, biking amenities, age sensitive exercise trails, safe parks, etc. * This section will include additional resource links

Not at all

Just starting

Partially complete

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Program I:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: __ 8___ Suggestions for revision: This seems to be a steering question in that it may help someone make the connection on how SG and AA could be tied together Level 4 4 A: SG: Program II: Our community is increasing its capacity through budget allocation, staff resources, infrastructure improvement, etc. for systematically expanding existing initiatives that combine smart growth principles and planning and active aging/ physical activity programs and opportunities.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially complete

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Program II:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: ___ 5__ Suggestions for revision: Two questions EPA Smart Growth & Active Aging National Recognition Program DCTM_ ARP. doc 9 4 B: SG: Program II: Our community is reaching out to local/ county/ state officials and departments, land developers, and community organizations to expand the integration of smart growth and active aging/ physical activity programs.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially complete

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Program II:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: ___ 5__ Suggestions for revision: Two Questions 4 C: PA: Program II: Our community includes gathering evidence about and evaluating the effectiveness of and level of participation in our active aging/ physical activity programs and opportunities for older adults.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially complete

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Program II:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: __ 8___ Suggestions for revision: Will there be resources in this section to help with this too?

4 D: PA: Program II: EPA Smart Growth & Active Aging National Recognition Program DCTM_ ARP. doc 10 Our community has an initiative that includes promotion, advertising, recruitment, and widely available programs and opportunities to engage more older adults in active aging/ physical activity.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially completed

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Program II:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: ___ 9__ Suggestions for revision: and/ or?

Level 5 5 A: SG: Program/ Process III: Our community has already implemented, or has the capacity to implement a model program combining smart growth principles with programs emphasizing active aging/ physical activity for older adults.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially completed

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Program/ Process III:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: __ 8___ Suggestions for revision: Ties the two together 5 B: SG: Program/ Process III: EPA Smart Growth & Active Aging National Recognition Program DCTM_ ARP. doc 11 Our community has a well established smart growth initiative and active aging/ physical activity programs and opportunities and is planning to expand these to a wider segment of our population as well as the partnerships that will support these programs.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially completed

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Program/ Process III:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: __ 6___

Suggestions for revision: Not sure if they are still supposed to be tied together 5 C: PA: Program/ Process III: Our community has an established coalition of service providers, advocacy organizations, businesses and governmental agencies who are cooperating to create more innovative and widely available programs that integrate smart growth principles and active aging/ physical activity programs and opportunities.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially completed

Fully Completed

Ongoing Describe Activity:

> How well does this item assess the content for Program/ Process III:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: __ 6__ Suggestions for revision: and/ or? Want two questions? ( both SG and AA)

5 D: PA: Program/ Process III: EPA Smart Growth & Active Aging National Recognition Program DCTM_ ARP. doc 12 Our community has an existing model program integrating active aging/ physical activity and smart growth for older adults and we can provide technical assistance and a contact person to share information with other communities.

Not at all

Just starting

Partially completed

Fully Completed

Ongoing Please describe your program/ initiative below or attach additional information:

Contact Person for program/ initiative described above: Name:_____________________________________________ Title:______________________________________________ Organization:_______________________________________ Address:___________________________________________ ____________________________________________ City:________________________________ State:_____ Zip:__________ Phone:___________________ Fax:_________________ Email:__________________________________________

> How well does this item assess the content for Program/ Process III:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not at all Adequately Very Well Your Score: ___ 9_ Suggestions for revision:

BETA TEST RESPONDENTS: PLEASE COMPLETE THE QUESTIONS BELOW:

> How was the process of completing this document for you and/ or your staff?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 EPA Smart Growth & Active Aging National Recognition Program DCTM_ ARP. doc 13 Easy Somewhat Difficult Difficult If you rated this process with a score of 6   10, please suggest how we might make this questionnaire easier to complete:

> Approximately how long did it take to complete this? 1 hr. _____ min.

> Would you recommend applying for this recognition program to other communities? X Yes ___ No Applicant completing this beta test form:

Name: Brandon D Flanagan Title: Planning and Zoning Director Organization: Lawrence County, South Dakota Address: 90 Sherman St.

City: Deadwood State: SD Zip: 57732 Phone: ( 605) 578 3871 Fax ( 605) 722 6221 Email: bflanaga@ lawrence. sd. us In reviewing the survey with my assistant and the County Civil Attorney, we would submit the following comments;

1) Dumb it Down   keep it simple: * Many of the questions are hard to follow or ask multiple questions or imply a certain procedure   ex. " strategic development plan" from 2 A: SG; ProcessII. * It is particularly confusing to figure out when the question is asking about smart growth and active aging as two separate items or if they should be connected. In our jurisdiction, we have certain provisions and aspects of " Smart Growth", but not active aging  that is left primarily to the municipalities.

2) The idea of including resources in with the survey would seem to be a great one.

Thank you for you assistance. Please return the completed MSWord document to Dr. John Migliaccio at drjohnmig@ aol. com or hardcopy by mail to Maturity Mark Services Co., 55 Springdale Ave., White Plains, NY 10604 2309 ( 914) 684 9112.


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 221 (Thursday, November 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 68196]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27801]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Notice of Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and
Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B
(Formerly Subpart Q) During the Week Ending October 20, 2012

    The following Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience
and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under Subpart
B (formerly Subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural
Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201 et. seq.). The due date for Answers,
Conforming Applications, or Motions to Modify Scope are set forth below
for each application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the
application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the
adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or inappropriate
cases a final order without further proceedings.
    Docket Number: DOT-OST-2012-0182.
    Date Filed: October 17, 2012.
    Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify
Scope: November 7, 2012.
    Description: Application of Global Supply Systems Limited (``GSS'')
requesting a new or amended foreign air carrier permit to enable GSS,
consistent with the open skies, U.S.-European Union (``EU'') Air
Transport Agreement, to provide: (i) Foreign scheduled and charter air
transportation of property and mail from any point or points behind any
Member State of the European Union, via any point or points in any
Member State and via any intermediate points to any point or points in
the United States and beyond; (ii) foreign scheduled and charter air
transportation of property and mail between any point or points in the
United States and any point or points in any member of the European
Common Aviation Area; (iii) foreign scheduled and charter cargo air
tansportation between any point or points in the United States and any
point or points; (iv) other charters pursuant to the requirements set
forth in the Department's regulations governing charters; and (v)
transportation authorized by any additional route rights made available
to European Union carriers in the future. GSS also requests (i)
exemption authority, to the extent necessary and for an initial period
of two years or until the requested permit is issued, to enable it to
hold out and provide the service described above; and (ii) such
additional or other relief as the Department may deem necessary or
appropriate.

Barbara J. Hairston,
 Acting Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 2012-27801 Filed 11-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 64 (Monday, April 4, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19414-19415]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07007]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0730; EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0731; EPA-R05-OAR-2022-0004;
FRL-9629-03-R5]

Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Redesignation of the Detroit, MI
Area to Attainment of the 2015 Ozone Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of public comment period.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is extending the
comment period for a proposed rule published March 14, 2022. In
response to a request from Sierra Club, EPA is extending the comment
period for 14 days.

DATES: The comment period for the proposed rule published on March 14,
2022, at 87 FR 14210, is extended. Comments must be received on or
before April 27, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2020-0730, EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0731, or EPA-R05-OAR-2022-0004, at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to [email protected]. Additional
instructions to comment can be found in the notice of proposed
rulemaking published March 14, 2022 (87 FR 14210).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Svingen, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected]. The EPA Region 5 office is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays and
facility closures due to COVID-19.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 14, 2022 (87 FR 14210), EPA
proposed to find that the Detroit, Michigan area is attaining the 2015
primary and secondary ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS), and to act in accordance with a request from the Michigan
Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) to
redesignate the area to attainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS because the
request meets the statutory requirements for redesignation under the
Clean Air Act. The Detroit area includes Livingston, Macomb, Monroe,
Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties. EGLE submitted this
request on January 3, 2022. EPA also proposed to approve, as a revision
to the Michigan State Implementation Plan, the State's plan for
maintaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS through 2035 in the Detroit area. EPA
also proposed to approve Michigan's 2025 and 2035 volatile organic
compound and oxides of nitrogen motor vehicle emissions budgets
(budgets) for the Detroit area and initiating the adequacy review
process for these budgets. Finally, EPA also proposed to approve
portions of separate December 18, 2020, submittals as meeting the
applicable requirements for a base year emissions inventory and
emissions statement program. On March 21, 2022, Sierra Club requested
that EPA extend the comment period by 21 days, to allow Sierra Club
additional time to ``review the basis for EPA's proposal and confer
with local partners.'' In response, EPA is extending the comment period
for 14 days. This extension provides additional time to Sierra Club and
its local partners, while also allowing time for EPA and EGLE to plan
for additional upcoming rulemakings that relate to EPA's findings on
this proposed action.

    Dated: March 28, 2022.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2022-07007 Filed 4-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


1.    Process (including improving current access and trying new approaches, flexibility, and clarity);
   2.    Partnerships (improving partnerships and building trust);
   3.    Technical details (numeric criteria, the data certainty issue);
   4.    Resources (ideas on how to continue to deliver in times of diminishing resources); and
   5.    Impact on production agriculture (unintended consequences, cost-benefit analysis, accountability and verification).

If the FRRCC does not write a report that considers whether and how these regulations could change American agriculture, the Committee would be remiss. Mr. Elworth asked for a clarification regarding resources. Dr. Burns responded that although this was a report to EPA, many of the resources needed to conduct the work discussed will not be coming from EPA.

Dr. Berger asked if information could be assembled in a matrix based on the presentations on the three geographic areas to include:  what was at stake, what were the "carrots and sticks," who were the important players, and what were the timelines. Common themes may emerge that could help the FRRCC assimilate the information.

Mr. Boggs suggested the following themes or barriers to changing behavior:  farmers need knowledge to change their behavior, economic constraints affect it as well, and values associated with clean water are a consideration that was not discussed. Resilience is another aspect that was not the subject of much discussion. What are the implications on farmers' productivity and the potential impact on feeding the growing population? A sensitivity analysis of the land base should be available. Reasonable methods of treatment are science-based, and EPA must consider what is reasonable to expect of the farmer. The land grant colleges and NRCS can establish this; as long as farmers are doing what is reasonable, they would have a safe harbor.

Mr. Treacy suggested the three topics of money, science and technologies, and approach. USDA discussed numerous funding mechanisms and partnerships, and there was much discussion about how to evaluate technologies to ensure that the best are used. Partnerships are key, and Mr. Treacy wants the FRRCC to be realistic about the partnerships in which EPA is willing to engage. Mr. Elworth responded that partnerships can work. EPA does not have regulatory authority for nonpoint sources in agriculture. The mechanism under TMDL to get some pressure on nonpoint sources is to regulate the point sources. The primary way to get changes in nonpoint source pollution is with partnerships. Mr. Treacy added that the Perdue partnership is a success story. Mr. Elworth noted that to have recommendations from the FRRCC that can be implemented, the Committee should consider the process EPA uses; the Agency identifies solutions, considers partnerships, and engages the regulatory process, and further uses partnerships in the implementation processes. Opportunities exist for partnerships in the documentation and communication of the results of the work conducted.

Dr. McFarland asked whether Dr. Burns, when referring to process, meant the process of watershed management or the process that EPA would be following. Dr. Burns responded that he meant the process of EPA working with agriculture, but that he liked Mr. Treacy's categories. "Approach" could cover partnerships. "Money" could include resources and economic impact on the agricultural sector. Dr. McFarland added that impact also could mean water improvement and the impact on the growers, both of which are measures of success. In terms of resources, she asked how EPA currently was prioritizing its work. Part of this may relate to strategic prioritization by the USDA and how EPA fits into that. Mr. Elworth responded that comments from the FRRCC on how and why EPA prioritizes its resources would be welcome.

Ms. Noble noted that the "rural communities" portion of the Committee's name had not been discussed. The mission for the Agency is protecting the environment and public health. The FRRCC composition seems to be more Midwestern and Eastern; in the West, the issue of the interplay of water quality in agriculture is a significant issue. Mr. Elworth responded that the report would be distributed to the public as well as to EPA, so it would be useful for the Committee to consider place-based issues that need to be discussed.

Dr. Sanders supported the themes suggested by Mr. Treacy, as long as it would be understood that linkages and overlaps will exist between them and that workgroups will need to communicate. It seems that the advisory part of the FRRCC's role is to be reactionary to what already has been planned and decided, but perhaps the role could be more anticipatory of emerging issues. Mr. Elworth replied that the discussion should not be constrained; the presentations were not meant to be the only parameters that could be discussed. Ms. Dilley asked how to frame the discussion so that it would be more anticipatory. Dr. Sanders suggested that the workgroups be given the opportunity to plan future meetings and choose the experts who would present.

Mr. Young suggested three themes:  a new approach, adaptation of new technologies, and the acceptance by farmers.

Dr. Popp noted that the group should consider the economic impacts on the producers and on the communities. These discussions must take place in each of the workgroups. Science-based technologies each have certain costs and benefits. Mr. Elworth added that the workgroups could be fluid, and there can be flexibility in how the Committee chooses to operate. Dr. Popp added that under each theme there should be an assessment of the pros and cons and opportunities and barriers.

Ms. Dilley suggested that the process include:  identifying and characterizing the problem; identifying/generating options and solutions; engaging the regulatory process; implementing solutions; and documenting and communicating results. If the process is combined with the three themes, a matrix approach to these issues begins to develop.

Mr. McDonald hoped that whatever approach was taken to address water quality could be applied to other issues affecting agriculture. Greenhouse gases and other issues also are important to agriculture, and perhaps should be part of the discussion. Ms. Dilley agreed that other issues are important. Dr. Balling added that water could be considered as a model; water issues will be different in other case studies. Discussions could be expanded, but water should be the focus.

Mr. Botts noted that there was a framework for a document that would drive the thought process to guide where we go from here. If the matrix is constructed and sent to the Committee for comment, what is the timeline for developing a comprehensive outline of the Committee's thoughts so that it can be ready for the next meeting? Ms. Dilley responded that the next steps, such as future meetings, formation of workgroups, and timelines, should be considered within the next several weeks. Mr. Elworth stated that EPA would like more interaction with the Committee in putting together the agenda and presenters for the next meeting. When the matrix is constructed, the question that Mr. McDonald raised about what this means for issues other than water should be flagged. Ms. Dilley suggested that a conference call might be needed if the comments on the matrix are very disparate. If the comments are similar, they should be integrated and a work plan developed.

Ms. Friedman thought the Committee should divide into groups so that on the next call members will be ready to work on their assigned area. Ms. Dilley replied that dividing into groups requires consideration of both the members' interests and the need to get a cross-section of perspectives in each group. Ms. Dilley and Mr. Elworth would want to identify the next steps for the workgroups so that by the next call, the groups would have made similar progress. Ms. Friedman added that it would be helpful to know the suggested length as well as the scope desired for the report.

Mr. Young suggested a show of hands to determine which of the groups the members would be interested in joining. Mr. Botts commented that when the matrix is sent out, there will be some specific questions that need to be defined on each of the issue areas; areas may overlap, but it is important that the content is covered. A second document incorporating comments should be sent to members.

Mr. McDaniel suggested a Webinar as an alternative to a conference call.

Mr. Treacy recommended including an attorney's input into the report to ensure that the FRRCC did not offer advice that would be useless because of the statutes under which EPA operates. Mr. Elworth will ask that attorneys from EPA come to a future meeting and interact with the Committee, but he would not send them a document to review. In response to Ms. Friedman's question about the length of the report, Mr. Elworth thought it would be rather short.

In response to a question from Dr. Sanders, Mr. Elworth stated that Ms. Kaiser should receive any comments from Committee members. Mr. Elworth added that the FRRCC should meet three times in the next 15 months; the next meeting would be held in February 2011. It is helpful to meet in Washington, DC, because EPA staff members are more readily available and the cost to EPA is less. Ms. Kaiser will send members a list of potential future meeting dates for review.

The FRRCC members decided to review the matrix before choosing workgroups.

Public Comment
Alicia Kaiser, DFO for the Committee

Ms. Kaiser called for public comments. None were offered at the meeting, but Ms. Kaiser distributed comments received via e-mail to the Committee. If members wish to respond to the comments, they should contact Ms. Kaiser.

Closing Remarks

Mr. Elworth noted that serving on this Committee presents an excellent opportunity for members to talk to the Agency about reactions to existing programs and water issues as well as many other environmental issues. He thanked the members for their input.

Dr. Balling thanked the FRRCC members for a robust and professional discussion and thanked the moderators for assembling the panels.

Ms. Kaiser noted that all of the presentations and background materials would be posted on the FRRCC Web Site. The option is available to create a semi-private Web site for any workgroup documents. Members who have materials to distribute to the Committee should send them to Ms. Kaiser.

Dr. Balling lastly thanked Ms. Kaiser and the EPA staff for their work in planning the meeting.

The meeting was adjourned at 12:28 p.m.

Action Items

oo Mr. Elworth will provide the Committee information on a rule developed on the impact of sediment and turbidity related to a state housing development (mentioned by Dr. McFarland).

oo Mr. Elworth and Ms. Dilley will compile a matrix of ideas for the Committee work plan and distribute it to FRRCC members for review along with questions on what else the Committee members will need.

oo Ms. Kaiser will send to the members a list of potential future meeting dates for review.

   Farm, Ranch, and Rural Communities Federal Advisory Committee (FRRCC)
            September 30  -  October 1, 2010, Meeting Participants

Committee Chair:

Steven S. Balling, Ph.D.
Del Monte Foods

Members:

G. Douglas Young (Deputy Chair)
Spruce Haven Farm and Research Center

Peggy Beltrone
Exergy Integrated Systems

Lori A. Berger, Ph.D.
California Specialty Crops Council

George J. Boggs
Whatcom Conservation District

A. Richard Bonanno
University of Massachusetts

Daniel A. Botts
Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association

Michael W. Brubaker
State Senate of Pennsylvania

Robert T. Burns, Ph.D.
University of Tennessee

Robert R. Carlson
North Dakota Farmers Union

Lawrence E. Clark
Farm Pilot Project Coordination

James W. Ford
Square "O" Consulting

Suzy Friedman
Environmental Defense Fund

Omar J. Garza
Texas Mexico Border Coalition

Archilus L. Hart
North Carolina Department of Agriculture

Lee McDaniel
Harford Soil Conservation District

Tom McDonald
JBS Five Rivers Cattle Feeding

Janis McFarland, Ph.D.
Syngenta Crop Protection

Steven R. McNinch
Western Plains Energy

Martha L. Noble
National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition

Bill Northey
Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land
   Stewardship

David D. Petty
Iowa River Ranch

Jennie S. Hughes Popp, Ph.D.
University of Arkansas

Larry D. Sanders, Ph.D.
Oklahoma State University

Alice Ann Sorenson, Ph.D.
American Farmland Trust

Dennis H. Treacy
Smithfield Foods

Ray E. Vester
E&M Farms Partnership

Designated Federal Officer:

Alicia Kaiser
Special Assistant for Agricultural Policy
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

EPA Participants:

Karma Anderson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10
Rick Batiuk
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Joanne Benante
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 4

Jack Bowles
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Ross Brennan
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Ann Carroll
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Frances Eagle
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Lawrence Elworth
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Katie Flahive
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Chuck Fox
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Damon Frizzell
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Lisa P. Jackson
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protect Agency

Alisha Johnson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Cynthia Jones-Jackson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Mark Joyce
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Ephraim King
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Van Kozak
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 6

John Larmett
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Sylvia Malm
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Andy Manale
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

David McGuigan
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 3

Jennifer Meints
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 8

Roberta Parry
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Bob Perciasepe
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Ann Pontius
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Jeffrey Potent
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Daniel Schulson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Pete Silva
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Denise Tennessee
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 4

Rob Wolcott
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Allison Wiedeman
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Hank Zygmunt
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Other Participants:

Drew Bartlett
Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Nathan Bowen
National Association of State Departments of
   Agriculture

Lloyd Day
Syngenta

Nick DeKryger
National Pork Producers Council

Bob Ehart
National Association of State Departments of
   Agriculture

Jim Gulliford
Soil and Water Conservation Society

Michael Formica
National Pork Producers Council

Irene Hantman
University of Maryland

Jon Harsch
Agri-Pulse

Tom Hebert
United Egg Producers

John Heltman
Inside EPA

Steve Hensley
USA Rice Federation

Sheryl Kunickis
U.S. Department of Agriculture

Dean Lemke
Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land
   Stewardship

Sarah Lynch
World Wildlife Fund

Jean Lurie
Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture

Ashley Lyon
National Cattlemen's Beef Association

Keith Menchey
National Cotton Council

Clark Mica
The Fertilizer Institute

Ann C. Mills
U.S. Deparment of Agriculture

Sarah Monke
The Fertilizer Institute

Michael Preston
NRWA

Russell C. Redding
Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture

Bill Satterfield
Delmarva Poultry Industry, Inc.

Burleson Smith
Policy Navigation Group

Tamara Thies
National Cattlemen's Beef Association

Kate Winston
Inside EPA

Jason Wood
AVMA

Support Contractors:

Abby Dilley
Resolve

Mary Spock
The Scientific Consulting Group, Inc.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 223 (Tuesday, November 19, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69408-69409]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27602]

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

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: PR14-5-000.
    Applicants: Washington Gas Light Company.
    Description: Tariff filing per 284.123(b)(1)/.: WGL TARIFF FILING
2013--Clone to be effective 11/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/1/13.
    Accession Number: 20131101-5166.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-150-000.
    Applicants: Enable Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Enable Gas Transmission, LLC submits tariff filing per
154.204: Negotiated Rate Filing--November 2013 Tenaska 9840 Att A to be
effective 11/5/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20131105-5058.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/18/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-151-000.
    Applicants: Northwest Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Northwest Pipeline LLC submits tariff filing per
154.204: NWP 2013 Housekeeping Filing to be effective 12/5/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20131105-5060.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/18/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-152-000.
    Applicants: National Grid LNG, LLC.
    Description: National Grid LNG, LLC submits tariff filing per
154.204: Housekeeping Filing to be effective 1/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 11/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20131105-5080.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/18/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-154-000.
    Applicants: PDC Energy, Inc., Alliance Petroleum Corporation.
    Description: Joint Petition of PDC Energy, Inc. and Alliance
Petroleum Corporation for Limited Waiver and Request for Expedited
Action.
    Filed Date: 11/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20131105-5144.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/12/13.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings

can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 6, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-27602 Filed 11-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55601-55602]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25318]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2428-007]

Aquenergy Systems, LLC; Notice of Application Ready for
Environmental Analysis and Soliciting Comments, Recommendations, Terms
and Conditions, and Prescriptions

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Subsequent License.
    b. Project No.: 2428-007.
    c. Date filed: December 30, 2015.
    d. Applicant: Aquenergy Systems, LLC (Aquenergy).
    e. Name of Project: Piedmont Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The existing project is located on the Saluda River in
the Town of Piedmont, in Anderson and Greenville Counties, South
Carolina. The project does not affect federal land.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)--825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Beth E. Harris, P.E., Regional Operations
Manager, Enel Green Power North America, Inc., 11 Anderson Street,
Piedmont, SC 29673; Telephone--(864) 846-0042; Email_
[email protected], OR Kevin Webb, Hydro Licensing Manager, Enel
Green Power North America, Inc., One Tech Drive, Suite 220, Andover, MA
01810; Telephone--(978) 681-1900; [email protected]
    i. FERC Contact: Navreet Deo,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing comments, recommendations, terms and
conditions, and prescriptions: 60 days from the issuance date of this
notice; reply comments are due 105 days from the issuance date of this
notice.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions
using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-2428-007.
    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.
    k. This application has been accepted and is now ready for
environmental analysis.
    l. The Piedmont Project consists of: (1) A 600-foot-long by 25-
foot-high stone masonry dam, consisting of (i) a 200-foot-long non-
overflow section, (ii) a 200-foot-long central overflow spillway topped
with 16-inch-high wooden flashboards, and (iii) a 200-foot-long non-
overflow spillway housing the inoperable J.P. Stevens Canal intake; (2)
a 22-acre impoundment at a normal pool elevation of 774 feet mean sea
level; (3) a 140-foot-long by 81-foot-wide intake canal consisting of
eight gates at the head of the canal controlling flow to the
powerhouse; (4) a 52-foot-long by 52-foot-wide brick masonry powerhouse
protected by a trashrack structure with 2-inch clear bar spacing,
located 120 feet downstream of the dam, containing one vertical Francis
turbine generating unit that totals 1,000 kilowatt (kW); (5) a 180-
foot-long by 38-foot-wide tailrace; (6) a 263-foot-long, 600-volt
transmission line connecting the powerhouse to the non-project
substation; and (7) appurtenant facilities.
    Aquenergy operates the project in a run-of-river mode using
automatic pond level control, with no useable storage or flood control
capacity. A continuous minimum flow of 15 cubic feet per second (cfs)
or inflow, whichever is less, is released into the bypassed area. The
minimum flow is achieved via an 8-foot-wide by 1-foot-deep weir on the
spillway crest. The project operates under an estimated average head of
26 feet, including the 16-inch-high spillway flashboards. The
impoundment water surface elevation is maintained at 774 feet. River
flows between 159 cfs and 535 cfs are used for power generation, while
flows in excess of 535 cfs are passed over the flashboards and
spillway. The total installed capacity of the project is 1,000 kW from
the single generating unit. The project generates approximately 5,369
megawatt-hours annually, which are sold to a local utility.
    Aquenergy proposes to continue to operate and maintain the Piedmont
Project as is required in the existing license, and to develop canoe
portage facilities.
    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. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in item h above.
    All filings must: (1) Bear in all capital letters the title
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 submitting the filing; 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. Each filing must be accompanied by proof of service
on all persons listed on

the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in
accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    n. 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.

    Dated: November 16, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-25318 Filed 11-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 163 (Thursday, August 24, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57961-57963]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18250]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2023-N-3498]

Endocrinologic and Metabolic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of
Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; establishment of a public docket; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announces a forthcoming
public advisory committee meeting of the Endocrinologic and Metabolic
Drugs Advisory Committee (the Committee). The general function of the
committee is to provide advice and recommendations to the Agency on
FDA's regulatory issues. The meeting will be open to the public. FDA is
establishing a docket for public comment on this document.

DATES: The meeting will be held virtually on September 21, 2023, from 9
a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time.

ADDRESSES: All meeting participants will be heard, viewed, captioned,
and recorded for this advisory committee meeting via an online
teleconferencing and/or video conferencing platform. Answers to
commonly asked questions about FDA advisory committee meetings
including information regarding special accommodations due to a
disability may be accessed at: https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm.
    FDA is establishing a docket for public comment on this meeting.
The docket number is FDA-2023-N-3498. Please note that late, untimely
filed comments will not be considered. The docket will close on
September 20, 2023. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing
system will accept comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of
September 20, 2023. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier
(for written/paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are
received on or before that date.
    Comments received on or before September 15, 2023, will be provided
to the Committee. Comments received after that date will be taken into
consideration by FDA. In the event that the meeting is canceled, FDA
will continue to evaluate any relevant applications or information, and
consider any comments submitted to the docket, as appropriate.
    You may submit comments as follows:

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-2023-N-3498 for ``Endocrinologic and Metabolic Drugs Advisory
Committee; Notice of Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request
for Comments.'' 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,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     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.'' FDA 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 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 the 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,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LaToya Bonner, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-2855, email: [email protected], or FDA Advisory Committee
Information Line, 1-800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in the Washington, DC
area). A notice in the Federal Register about last-minute modifications
that impact a previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot
always be published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore,
you should always check FDA's website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down to the appropriate
advisory committee meeting link, or call the advisory committee
information line to learn about possible modifications before the
meeting.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Agenda: The meeting presentations will be heard, viewed, captioned,
and recorded through an online teleconferencing and/or video
conferencing platform. The Committee will discuss the safety and
efficacy of ITCA 650 (exenatide in DUROS device), a drug-device
combination product that is the subject of a new drug application (NDA)
submitted by Intarcia Therapeutics, Inc. (Intarcia) (NDA 209053), for
the proposed indication, as an adjunct to diet and exercise, to improve
glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. CDER is
holding this meeting pursuant to a March 24, 2023, letter from the
Chief Scientist of FDA, Dr. Namandj[eacute] N. Bumpus, wherein she
granted Intarcia's request under 21 CFR 12.32(b)(3)(ii) for a public
hearing before an advisory committee in lieu of a formal evidentiary
hearing. Intarcia requested a public hearing before an advisory
committee on CDER's proposal to refuse approval of Intarcia's NDA for
ITCA 650 (see Docket No. FDA-2021-N-0874).
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its website prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available on FDA's website at
the time of the advisory committee meeting. Background material and the
link to the online teleconference and/or video conference meeting will
be available at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting
link. The meeting will include slide presentations with audio and video
components to allow the presentation of materials in a manner that most
closely resembles an in-person advisory committee meeting.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the Committee.
All electronic and written submissions to the Docket (see ADDRESSES) on
or before September 15, 2023, will be provided to the Committee. Oral
presentations from the public will be scheduled between approximately
1:30 p.m. and 2:30 p.m. Eastern Time. Those individuals interested in
making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and
submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or
arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed
participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to
make their presentation on or before September 13, 2023. Time allotted
for each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants
requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated
during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a
lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing
session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding
their request to speak by September 14, 2023.
    For press inquiries, please contact the Office of Media Affairs at
[email protected] or<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee

meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please
contact LaToya Bonner (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7
days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.). This meeting notice also serves
as notice that, pursuant to 21 CFR 10.19, the requirements in 21 CFR
14.22(b), (f), and (g) relating to the location of advisory committee
meetings are hereby waived to allow for this meeting to take place
using an online meeting platform. This waiver is in the interest of
allowing greater transparency and opportunities for public
participation, in addition to convenience for advisory committee
members, speakers, and guest speakers. No participant will be
prejudiced by this waiver and that the ends of justice will be served
by allowing for this modification to FDA's advisory committee meeting
procedures.

    Dated: August 21, 2023.
Lauren K. Roth,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-18250 Filed 8-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 210 (Wednesday, November 1, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50641-50642]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23780]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER18-157-000]

DV Trading, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
DV Trading, LLC`s application for market-based rate authority, with an
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is November 15, 2017.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
[email protected]. or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: October 26, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-23780 Filed 10-31-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 193 (Thursday, October 6, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60674-60675]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21762]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 10661-051]

Indiana Michigan Power Company; Notice of Application Accepted
for Filing, Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests, Ready for
Environmental Analysis, and Soliciting Comments, Preliminary Terms and
Conditions, and Preliminary Fishway Prescriptions

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Subsequent License.
    b. Project No.: 10661-051.
    c. Date filed: September 30, 2021.
    d. Applicant: Indiana Michigan Power Company.
    e. Name of Project: Constantine Hydroelectric Project (Constantine
Project).
    f. Location: The Constantine Project is located on the St. Joseph
River in the Village of Constantine in St. Joseph County, Michigan. The
project does not occupy federal lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Jonathan Magalski, Environmental Supervisor,
Renewables, Indiana Michigan Power Company; 1 Riverside Plaza,
Columbus, Ohio 43215 at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at [email protected].
    i. FERC Contact: Lee Emery at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing comments, recommendations, terms and
conditions, and prescriptions: 60 days from the issuance date of this
notice; reply comments are due 105 days from the issuance date of this
notice.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene, protests, comments, recommendations, preliminary
terms and conditions, and preliminary fishway prescriptions using the
using the Commission's eFiling system at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/FERCOnline.aspx. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at
https://ferconline.ferc.gov/QuickComment.aspx. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a paper
request. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed
to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent
via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue,
Rockville, Maryland 20852. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-10661-051.
    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.
    k. This application has been accepted for filing and is now ready
for environmental analysis.
    The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) issued a final rule on
April 20, 2022, revising the regulations under 40 CFR parts 1502, 1507,
and 1508 that federal agencies use to implement the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (see National Environmental Policy Act
Implementing Regulations Revisions, 87 FR 23,453-70). The final rule
became effective on May 20, 2022. Commission staff intends to conduct
its NEPA review in accordance with CEQ's new regulations.
    l. The Constantine Project consists of: (1) an 525-acre reservoir
with a storage capacity of 5,750 acre-feet at a water surface elevation
of 782.94 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD); (2) a 561.25-
foot-long dam consisting of, from east to west: (a) a 250-foot-long,
22.5-foot-high embankment with a top elevation of 790 feet NGVD, (b) a
241.25-foot-long, 12-foot-high uncontrolled concrete overflow spillway
dam with a fixed crest elevation of 781.96 feet NGVD, topped by 0.94-
foot-high flashboards with a crest elevation of 782.90 feet NGVD, which
includes a 4-foot sluice gate at the left abutment, and (c) a 70-foot-
long earthen embankment; (3) a 650-foot-long, 20-foot-high earthen
detached dike that begins 1,500 feet east of the left abutment of the
spillway dam, with a top elevation of 790 feet NGVD; (4) a 68-foot-
long, 20-foot-high concrete headgate structure consisting of seven
wooden 15-foot-high vertical slide gates with a sill elevation of
770.00 feet NGVD with six 7.83-foot-long gates and one 6.75-foot-long
gate located at the entrance to the power canal; (5) a 1,270-foot-long
power canal with a bottom width of 60 feet; (6) a 140-foot-long, 30-
foot-wide brick powerhouse; (7) trash racks in front of the forebay at
the entrance to the powerhouse; (8) four vertical shaft Francis
turbines each coupled to a 300-kilowatt generator, for a total
installed capacity of 1.2 megawatts; (9) a switchyard adjacent to the
powerhouse with three step-up transformers; (10) a 50-foot-long, 2.4-
kilovolt transmission line; and (11) appurtenant facilities.
    The Constantine Project is operated in a run-of-river mode with an
estimated average annual energy production of 4,933 megawatt-hours.
Indiana Michigan Power Company proposes to continue operating the
project as a run-of-river facility and does not propose any new
construction to the project.
    m. A copy of the application can be viewed on the Commission's
website 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.
    At this time, the Commission has suspended access to the
Commission's Public Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a
National Emergency concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19),
issued by the President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC
at [email protected] or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    n. 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, .211, and .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'', ``COMMENTS,'' ``REPLY COMMENTS,''
``RECOMMENDATIONS,'' ``PRELIMINARY TERMS AND CONDITIONS,'' or
``PRELIMINARY FISHWAY 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.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    o. The 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. Please note
that the certification request must comply with 40 CFR 121.5(b),
including documentation that a pre-filing meeting request was submitted
to the certifying authority at least 30 days prior to submitting the
certification request. Please note that the certification request must
be sent to the certifying authority and to the Commission concurrently.
    p. Procedural schedule: The application will be processed according
to the following schedule. Revisions to the schedule will be made as
appropriate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Milestone                           Target date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deadline for Filing Protest, Motion to       November 2022.
 Intervene, Comments, Recommendations,
 Preliminary Terms and Conditions, and
 Preliminary Fishway Prescriptions.
Deadline for Filing Reply Comments.........  January 2023.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    q. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of this notice.

    Dated: September 30, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-21762 Filed 10-5-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 139 (Friday, July 23, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38907-38909]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15478]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0865; Project Identifier 2010-SW-061-AD; Amendment
39-21653; AD 2021-15-06]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bell Textron Canada Limited (Type
Certificate Previously Held by Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited (now Bell Textron Canada
Limited) Model 206A, 206B, 206L, 206L-1, 206L-3, and 206L-4
helicopters. This AD was prompted by a report that a certain tail rotor
disc assembly, sold as an alternate part, does not conform to the
approved configuration. This AD requires determining if an affected
part is installed (by doing a maintenance records check or inspection),
and if an affected part is found, replacement with a non-affected part.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective August 27, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain documents listed in this AD as of August 27, 2021.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir,
Mirabel, Quebec J7J1R4; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (450)
433-0272; internet: https://www.bellcustomer.com. You may view the
referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort
Worth, TX 76177. Service information that is incorporated by reference
is also available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2010-0865.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2010-0865; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, the
Transport Canada AD, any comments received, and other information. The
street address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Arrigotti, Program Manager,
Large Aircraft Section, International Validation Branch, Compliance &
Airworthiness Division, FAA, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA
98198; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM)
to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain
Bell Textron Canada Limited Model 206A, 206B, 206L, 206L-1, 206L-3, and
206L-4 helicopters. The SNPRM published in the Federal Register on May
7, 2021 (86 FR 24560). The SNPRM proposed to require determining if an
affected part is installed (by doing a maintenance records check or
inspection), and if an affected part is found, replacement with a non-
affected part. The SNPRM also revised the format, rearranged certain
paragraphs, converted a certain table to paragraph format, and removed
certain language. The SNPRM was prompted by a significant amount of
time elapsing since the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (75 FR
52914, August 30, 2010) was issued, requiring the FAA to reopen the
comment period to allow the public a chance to comment on the proposed
actions.
    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, issued Canadian AD CF-2010-07, dated February 24,
2010 (Canadian AD CF-2010-07), to correct an unsafe condition for
certain Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited (now Bell Textron Canada
Limited) Model 206A, 206B, 206L, 206L-1, 206L-3, and 206L-4
helicopters. TCCA advises that a certain tail rotor disc assembly, sold
through Bell Helicopter Spares beginning March 2009, as an alternate,
does not conform to the approved configuration. TCCA stated operating a
helicopter with the affected tail rotor disc assembly could result in
loss of control of the helicopter.
    Accordingly, the Canadian AD requires determining if an affected
part is installed, and if an affected part is found, replacement with a
non-affected part.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive Comments

    The FAA received a comment from one commenter, Bell Textron Canada
Limited. The following presents the comment received on the SNPRM and
the FAA's response to the comment.

Request To Add a Statement for Operators That Already Complied With the
Actions

    Bell Textron Canada Limited requested that the FAA add a statement
to the effect that if the actions in Bell Helicopter Alert Service
Bulletin 206-09-123, Revision A, dated June 10, 2009; or Bell
Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin 206L-09-157, Revision A, dated June
10, 2009; have already been accomplished then the intent of the AD is
met and no further action is required. The commenter stated that many
operators will have already complied with the intent of the proposed AD
since the service information was released in 2009.
    The FAA acknowledges the commenter's request and agrees to clarify.
Paragraph (g) of this AD requires accomplishing actions using Bell
Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin 206-09-123, Revision A, dated June
10, 2009; or Bell Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin 206L-09-157,
Revision A, dated June 10, 2009. Paragraph (f) of this AD states to
accomplish the required actions within the compliance times specified,
``unless already done.'' Therefore, if operators have accomplished the
actions required for compliance with this AD before the effective date
of this AD, no further action is necessary. The FAA has not revised
this AD in this regard.

Conclusion

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Canada and

are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's
bilateral agreement with Canada, TCCA, its technical representative,
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in its AD. The
FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and
determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed.
Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these helicopters.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed the following service information. This service
information specifies procedures to determine if an affected part is
installed, and if an affected part is found, replacement with a non-
affected part. These documents are distinct since they apply to
different helicopter models.
     Bell Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin 206-09-123,
Revision A, dated June 10, 2009.
     Bell Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin 206L-09-157,
Revision A, dated June 10, 2009.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 1,493 helicopters of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85.............................            $303             $388         $579,284
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2021-15-06 Bell Textron Canada Limited (Type Certificate Previously
Held by Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited): Amendment 39-21653;
Docket No. FAA-2010-0865; Project Identifier 2010-SW-061-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective August 27, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the following Bell Textron Canada Limited
(type certificate previously held by Bell Helicopter Textron Canada
Limited) helicopters, certificated in any category:
    (1) Model 206A, serial numbers 004 through 660 inclusive, and
672 through 715 inclusive;
    (2) Model 206B, all serial numbers, including those converted
from Model 206A;
    (3) Model 206L, serial numbers 45004 through 45153 inclusive,
and 46601 through 46617 inclusive;
    (4) Model 206L-1, serial numbers 45154 through 45790 inclusive;
    (5) Model 206L-3, serial numbers 51001 through 51612 inclusive;
and
    (6) Model 206L-4, all serial numbers.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 65, Tail Rotor
Drive.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report that a certain tail rotor disc
assembly, sold as an alternate part, does not conform to the
approved configuration. The FAA is issuing this AD to address
helicopters operating with a certain tail rotor disc assembly, sold
as an alternate part, that does not conform to the approved
configuration, which could result in loss of control of the
helicopter.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Do the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (4) of
this AD, in accordance with Bell Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin
206-09-123, Revision A, dated June 10, 2009; or Bell Helicopter
Alert Service Bulletin 206L-09-157, Revision A, dated June 10, 2009,
as applicable.
    (1) Within 30 days or 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, review the
helicopter maintenance records to determine if a disc assembly, part
number (P/N) 101584-1 or -2, is installed.
    (2) If, during the maintenance records review required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, you cannot positively determine that
disc assembly P/N 101584-1 or -2 is not installed, within 30 days or
100 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
first, inspect the tail rotor driveshaft system to determine if disc
assembly P/N 101584-1 or -2 is installed.

    (3) If, during the maintenance records review required by
paragraph (g)(1) of the this AD or during the inspection required by
paragraph (g)(2) of this AD, you can positively determine that a
disc assembly P/N 101584-1 or -2 is not installed, before further
flight, make an entry in the log book showing compliance with this
AD.
    (4) If, during the maintenance records review required by
paragraph (g)(1) of this AD or during the inspection required by
paragraph (g)(2) of this AD, you can positively determine that a
disc assembly P/N 101584-1 or -2 is installed, within 30 days or 100
hours TIS after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
first, replace disc assembly P/N 101584-1 or -2 with disc assembly
P/N 32721-1.

(h) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, do not install disc
assembly P/N 101584-1 or -2.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, 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 International Validation Branch, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (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.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Kathleen
Arrigotti, Program Manager, Large Aircraft Section, International
Validation Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax: (206) 231-
3218; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in Transport Canada
Civil Aviation (TCCA) Canadian AD CF-2010-07, dated February 24,
2010. You may view the TCCA AD at https://www.regulations.gov in
Docket No. FAA-2010-0865.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Bell Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin 206-09-123, Revision
A, dated June 10, 2009.
    (ii) Bell Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin 206L-09-157,
Revision A, dated June 10, 2009.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact Bell
Helicopter Textron Canada Limited, 12,800 Rue de l'Avenir, Mirabel,
Quebec J7J1R4; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (450) 433-
0272; internet: https://www.bellcustomer.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room
6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on July 9, 2021.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-15478 Filed 7-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P