[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 118 (Tuesday, June 19, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36442-36443]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14937]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0826; FRL-9689-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Michigan; PSD Regulations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) construction permit program of State of
Michigan's State Implementation Plan (SIP) to meet the Clean Air Act
(CAA) requirements for PSD in Class I Areas attaining the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 19, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2011-0826, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: Genevieve Damico, Chief, Air Permits Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Genevieve Damico, Chief, Air Permits Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Regional Office official hours of business are Monday
through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2011-0826. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
instructions on submitting comments, go to Section I of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays.
We recommend that you telephone Constantine Blathras, Environmental
Engineer, at<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Constantine Blathras, Environmental
Engineer, Air Permits Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. What revisions are included in the proposed approval?
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

    When submitting comments, remember to:
    1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    2. Follow directions--EPA may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
    7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.

II. What revisions are included in the proposed approval?

    On September 2, 2011, the Michigan Department of Environmental
Quality (MDEQ) submitted to EPA for approval a revision to the Michigan
SIP consisting of amendments to Michigan Air Pollution Control Rules,
Part 18, PSD, and Part 19, PSD for major sources. Specifically,
Michigan submitted a revision to modify Michigan Air Pollution Control
Rule R. 336.2816 to

make it consistent with the Federal requirements for PSD in Class I
Areas. Additionally, Michigan submitted amendments to modify Michigan's
Air Pollution Control Rules R. 336.2801 and R. 336.2910 to add a
significance threshold of 10 tons per year for particulate matter less
than 2.5 microns in size (PM2.5). However, EPA is not
proposing action on the particulate matter amendments in this
rulemaking action; we will propose action at a later date, when
Michigan submits additional rules pertaining to its definitions for
PM2.5.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to approve Michigan's request to revise its SIP to
add rule R. 336.2816 to be consistent with Federal PSD regulations in
40 CFR 51.166(p), that require state PSD programs to have a mechanism
in place to coordinate and consult with Federal land managers of Class
I PSD Areas. On September 16, 2008, EPA proposed to disapprove R
336.2816 from Michigan's SIP submittal because it did not provide for
such a mechanism. Michigan has now revised R. 336.2816 to be consistent
with the Federal requirement. With this change, EPA is proposing to
fully approve the revised R. 336.2816 for its PSD program. On March 25,
2010, EPA published a direct final approval to convert a conditional
approval of the Michigan PSD SIP to full approval under section 110 of
the CAA. In that notice, EPA stated that we would be taking a separate
action on rule R. 336.2816(2) through (4)(requirements relating to
Class I Areas).
    EPA is not proposing to approve Michigan's request to revise its
SIP by adding requirements for a significance level for
PM2.5. EPA has established a significance threshold to limit
the applicability of PSD regulations to sources with emissions above
the significance level. To be consistent with the Federal requirements,
Michigan amended R. 336.2801 and R. 336.2901 to add the significance
threshold for PM2.5. Because Michigan is planning to submit
additional state rules as revisions to its SIP for precursors of
PM2.5, EPA will defer action on this matter.
    EPA is also proposing to approve the removal of R. 336.2830 and R.
336.2910 from the Michigan SIP. Appeals of state permit actions will be
handled through the state's appeal process.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. This action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    In May 2011, EPA issued its policy on consultation and coordination
with Indian tribes. EPA explained that its policy is to consult on a
government to government basis with Federally recognized tribal
governments when EPA actions and decisions may affect tribal interests.
Accordingly, EPA sent an invitation to consult with potentially
interested tribes, and subsequently engaged in consultation with
representatives of the Forest County Potawatomi Community regarding the
Michigan proposed SIP revisions.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: June 11, 2012.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2012-14937 Filed 6-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 182 (Thursday, September 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65168-65169]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20455]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2354-170]

Georgia Power Company; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing
and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Application Type: Non-Capacity Amendment of License.
    b. Project No.: 2354-170.
    c. Date Filed: April 4, 2023, and supplemented on August 3, 2023,
and August 9, 2023.
    d. Applicant: Georgia Power Company.
    e. Name of Project: North Georgia Project.
    f. Location: Savannah River basin on the Tallulah, Chattooga, and
Tugalo Rivers, in Rabun, Habersham, and Stephens counties, Georgia, and
Oconee County, South Carolina.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Courtenay O'Mara, Hydro Licensing &
Compliance Supervisor, 241 Ralph McGill Boulevard, NE, BIN 10193,
Atlanta, Georgia 30308-3374,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].
    i. FERC Contact: Aneela Mousam,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests: 30 days from the issuance date of this notice by the
Commission.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, and protests 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/doc-sfiling/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<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, you may
submit a paper copy. 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 the docket number P-2354-170. Comments emailed to Commission
staff are not considered part of the Commission record.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears 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. Description of Request: Georgia Power Company (licensee)
requests Commission approval to replace and upgrade two generating
units in the Nacoochee powerhouse. The licensee proposes to replace
turbine runners and generators. The proposed upgrades would increase
the Nacoochee Development's installed capacity from 4.8 megawatt (MW)
to 5.48 MW. The maximum hydraulic capacity would decrease from 1,382
cubic feet per second (cfs) to 1,258 cfs (9% decrease). The licensee
does not anticipate any adverse effect to environmental resources as a
result of the proposed amendment.
    l. Locations of the Application: This filing may 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. 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, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
[email protected], for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. Agencies may
obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Motions to Intervene, or Protests: 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,
.214, respectively. 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.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (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 commenting, protesting or intervening; and (4)
otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through
385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set
forth their evidentiary basis. Any filing made by an intervenor 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 385.2010.
    p. The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: September 15, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-20455 Filed 9-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions that I may want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but this is a lengthy process. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. Quite simply, I firmly believe that they saved my life, and they ended my dependence on combustable tobacco. I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 187 (Tuesday, September 27, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 59599-59600]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24375]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2009-0839; FRL-9469-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Indiana; Redesignation of the Indianapolis Area to Attainment of the
1997 Annual Standard for Fine Particulate Matter

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve Indiana's request to redesignate
the Indianapolis, Indiana nonattainment area (Hamilton, Hendricks,
Johnson, Marion, and Morgan Counties) to attainment for the 1997 annual
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard) for fine
particulate matter (PM2.5), because the request meets the
statutory requirements for redesignation under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) submitted
this request on October 20, 2009, and supplemented it on May 31, 2011.
EPA's proposed approval involves several additional related actions.
EPA is proposing to make a determination that the Indianapolis area has
attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard. EPA is proposing to
approve, as a revision to the Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP),
the State's plan for maintaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
through

2025 in the area. EPA is proposing to approve the 2006 emissions
inventory for the Indianapolis area as meeting the comprehensive
emissions inventory requirement of the CAA. Finally, EPA finds adequate
and is proposing to approve Indiana's Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
and PM2.5 Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for 2015
and 2025 for the Indianapolis area.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 27, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2009-0839, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: Doug Aburano, Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Doug Aburano, Chief, Control Strategies Section,
Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Regional Office official hours of business are Monday
through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules
section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to
submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental
Engineer, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the determination of attainment,
redesignation, and SIP as a direct final rule without prior proposal
because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial action and
anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval
is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are
received in response to this rule, no further activity is contemplated.
If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be
withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a
subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA
receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this
rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the
rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not
the subject of an adverse comment. For additional information, see the
direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this Federal
Register.

    Dated: September 12, 2011.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2011-24375 Filed 9-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: January 20, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 12)]
[Notices]
[Page 3219-3220]
[DOCID:fr20ja10-57]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER10-537-000]

Palmco Power MD, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

January 8, 2010.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Palmco Power MD, 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 January 28, 2010.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access

who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First 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 review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-920 Filed 1-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 129 (Friday, July 5, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40399-40402]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16049]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0493]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Fifth Coast Guard District Fireworks Displays,
Delaware River; Philadelphia, PA.

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is temporarily changing the enforcement date
of a safety zone for one recurring fireworks display in the Fifth Coast
Guard District. This regulation applies to only one recurring fireworks
event held in Delaware River in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The
fireworks display is normally held on July 4th, but this year it will
be held on July 6th. The safety zone is necessary to provide for the
safety of life on navigable waters during the event. This action is
intended to restrict vessel traffic in a portion of Delaware River near
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, during the event.

DATES: This rule will be effective on July 6, 2013, from 9:15 p.m.
until 10:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2013-0493]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also
visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Veronica Smith, U.S. Coast Guard Sector
Delaware Bay, Chief of Waterways Management Division; telephone 215-
271-4851, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Barbara Hairston,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

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

A. Regulatory History and Information

    This regulation for this fireworks display event may be found at 33
CFR 165.506, Table to Sec.  165.506, section (a), line ``16''.
    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.''
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for not publishing a notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because it is
impracticable. Insufficient time remains to address the change in date
for this event and immediate action is needed to minimize potential
danger to the public during the event. The potential dangers posed by
fireworks displays makes a safety zone necessary to provide for the
safety of participants, spectator craft and other vessels transiting
the event area. Because of the timeframe and safety concerns noted, it
is impracticable to issue an NPRM for this regulation. The Coast Guard
will issue broadcast notice to mariners to advise vessel operators of
navigational restrictions. On scene Coast Guard and local law
enforcement vessels will also provide actual notice to mariners.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For the same reasons as stated
previously, a 30 day delayed effective date is impracticable and
contrary to the public interest.

B. Basis and Purpose

    Recurring fireworks displays are frequently held on or adjacent to
the navigable waters within the boundary of the Fifth Coast Guard
District. For a description of the geographical area of each Coast
Guard Sector--Captain of the Port (COTP) Zone, please see 33 CFR 3.25.
    The regulation listing annual fireworks displays within the Fifth
Coast Guard District and safety zones locations is 33 CFR 165.506. The
Table to Sec.  165.506 identifies fireworks displays by COTP zone, with
the COTP Delaware Bay zone listed in section ``(a)'' of the Table.
    Wawa Welcome America sponsors an annual fireworks display held on
July 4th over the waters of Delaware River, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
The Table to Sec.  165.506, at section (a) event number ``16'',
describes the enforcement date and regulated location for this
fireworks event.
    In the Table, this fireworks display occurs annually on July 4th.
However, this year, the fireworks event will be held on July 6, 2013.
    A fleet of spectator vessels are anticipated to gather nearby to
view the fireworks display. Due to the need for vessel control during
the fireworks display, vessel traffic will be temporarily restricted to
provide for the safety of participants, spectators and transiting
vessels. Under provisions of 33 CFR 165.506, during the enforcement
period, vessels may not enter the regulated area unless they receive
permission from the Coast Guard Patrol Commander.

C. Discussion of the Final Rule

    The Coast Guard will temporarily suspend the regulation listed in
Table to Sec.  165.506, section (a) event Number ``16'', and insert
this temporary regulation at Table to Sec.  165.506, at section (a) as
event Number ``18'', in order to reflect that the fireworks display
will be held on July 6, 2013, and therefore the enforcement date is
changed. This change is needed to accommodate the sponsor's event plan.
No other portion of the Table to Sec.  165.506 or other provisions in
Sec.  165.506 will be affected by this regulation.
    The regulated area of this safety zone includes all the waters of
the Delaware River, adjacent to Penn's Landing, Philadelphia, PA,
bounded from shoreline to shoreline, bounded on the south by a line
running east to west from points along the shoreline at latitude
39[deg]56'31.2'' N, longitude 075[deg]08'28.1'' W; thence to latitude
39[deg]56'29.1'' N, longitude 075[deg]07'56.5'' W, and bounded on the
north by the Benjamin Franklin Bridge.
    This safety zone will restrict general navigation in the regulated
area during the fireworks event. Except for persons or vessels
authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may
enter or remain in the regulated area during the effective period. The
regulated area is needed to control vessel traffic during the event for
the safety of participants and transiting vessels.
    In addition to notice in the Federal Register, the maritime
community will be provided extensive advance notification via the Local
Notice to Mariners, and marine information broadcasts so mariners can
adjust their plans accordingly.

D. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    This rule prevents traffic from transiting a portion of the
Delaware River, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania during the specified
event, the effect of this regulation will not be significant due to the
limited duration that the regulated area will be in effect and the
extensive advance notifications that will be made to the maritime
community via marine information broadcasts, local radio stations and
area newspapers so that mariners can adjust their plans accordingly.
Additionally, this rulemaking changes the enforcement date for Delaware
River, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania fireworks demonstration for July 6,
2013 only and does not change the permanent enforcement period that has
been published in 33 CFR 165.506, Table to Sec.  165.506 at section
(a), event Number ``16''. In some cases vessel traffic may be able to
transit the regulated area when the Coast Guard Patrol Commander deems
it is safe to do so.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    This rule would affect the following entities, some of which might
be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit or anchor in Delaware River, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
where fireworks events are being held. This regulation will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because it
will be enforced only during the fireworks display event that has been
permitted by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port. The Captain of the
Port will ensure that small entities are able to operate in the
regulated area when it is safe to do so. In some cases, vessels will be
able to safely transit around the regulated area at various times, and,
with the permission of the Patrol Commander, vessels may transit
through the regulated area. Before the enforcement period, the Coast
Guard will issue maritime advisories so

mariners can adjust their plans accordingly.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

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

6. Protest Activities

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

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

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

9. Civil Justice Reform

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

10. Protection of Children

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

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

12. Energy Effects

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

13. Technical Standards

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

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves the establishment of a safety zone.
This rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph
34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental
analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical
Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.

0
2. In Sec.  165.506, amend the Table to Sec.  165.506, under the
heading (a) Coast Guard Sector Delaware Bay--COTP Zone by--
0
a. Suspending entry 16, ``Delaware River, Philadelphia, PA, Safety
Zone,'' from 9:15 p.m. on July 4, 2013, until 10:30 p.m. on July 6,
2013.
0
b. Adding entry 18 from 9:15 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. on July 6, 2013, to
read as follows:

Sec.  165.506  Safety Zones; Fireworks Displays in the Fifth Coast
Guard District.

* * * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Number                     Date             Location                    Regulated area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                 (a) Coast Guard Sector Delaware Bay--COTP Zone
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18............................  July 6 from 9:15   Delaware River,    All the waters of the Delaware River,
                                 p.m. until 10:30   Philadelphia,      adjacent to Penns Landing, Philadelphia,
                                 p.m.               PA, Safety Zone.   PA, bounded from shoreline to shoreline,
                                                                       bounded on the south by a line running
                                                                       east to west from points along the
                                                                       shoreline at latitude 39[deg]56'31.2'' N,
                                                                       longitude 075[deg]08'28.1'' W; thence to
                                                                       latitude 39[deg]56'29.1'' N, longitude
                                                                       075[deg]07'56.5'' W, and bounded on the
                                                                       north by the Benjamin Franklin Bridge.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

    Dated: June 24, 2013.
K. Moore,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Delaware Bay.
[FR Doc. 2013-16049 Filed 7-3-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 174 (Friday, September 9, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55467-55468]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19515]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2022-0069; Notice 1]

Hercules Tire & Rubber Company, Receipt of Petition for Decision
of Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Hercules Tire & Rubber Company, (Hercules), has determined
that certain Ironman iMOVE PT specialty trailer tires do not fully
comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139, New
Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Hercules filed an original
noncompliance report dated May 10, 2022, and amended the report on May
12, 2022. Hercules petitioned NHTSA on June 21, 2022, for a decision
that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to
motor vehicle safety. This document announces receipt of Hercules's
petition.

DATES: Send comments on or before October 11, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the
docket and notice number cited in the title of this notice and may be
submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver comments by hand to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
except for Federal Holidays.
     Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Comments may also be faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments must be written in the English language, and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that comments you have submitted by mail were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    All comments and supporting materials received before the close of
business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the
docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the fullest extent possible.
    When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will
also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated at the end of this notice.
    All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials
submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and
times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for
accessing the dockets. The docket ID number for this petition is shown
in the heading of this notice.
    DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a
Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jayton Lindley, General Engineer,
NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Overview

    Hercules determined that certain Ironman iMOVE PT specialty trailer
tires do not fully comply with paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139,
New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles (49 CFR 571.139).
    Hercules filed an original noncompliance report dated May 10, 2022,
and amended the report on May 12, 2022, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. Hercules
subsequently petitioned NHTSA on June 21, 2022, for an exemption from
the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on
the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to
motor vehicle safety, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and
49 CFR part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or Noncompliance.
    This notice of receipt of Hercules's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any agency decision or
another exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.

II. Tires Involved

     Approximately 555 Ironman iMOVE PT specialty trailer tires,
manufactured between August 14, 2021, and August 20, 2021, are
potentially involved:

III. Noncompliance

     Hercules explains that the subject tires are labeled with a tire

identification number (TIN) that does not contain the correct date
code, as stated by 49 CFR 574.5(b)(3), and therefore does not comply
with paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139. Specifically, the date code
as stated in the TIN on the subject tires is ``3231'' when it should
state ``3321.''

IV. Rule Requirements

     Paragraph S5.5.1(b) of FMVSS No. 139 and 49 CFR 574.5(b)(3)
include the requirements relevant to this petition. Each tire
(manufactured on or after September 1, 2009) must be labeled with the
TIN, as required by 49 CFR part 574, on the intended outboard sidewall
of the tire. The date code, consisting of four numerical symbols, is
the final group of the TIN and must identify the tire's week and year
of manufacture. The first and second symbols of the date code must
identify the week of the year by using ``01'' for the first full
calendar week in each year, ``02'' for the second full calendar week,
and so on. The third and fourth symbols of the date code must identify
the last two digits of the year of manufacture.

V. Summary of Hercules's Petition

     The following views and arguments presented in this section, ``V.
Summary of Hercules's Petition,'' are the views and arguments provided
by Hercules. They have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not
reflect the views of the Agency. Hercules describes the subject
noncompliance and contends that the noncompliance is inconsequential as
it relates to motor vehicle safety.
    Hercules explains that two of the numerical symbols used in the TIN
were inadvertently transposed and incorrectly states the date code
``3231.'' Hercules says that the tires should have been marked
``3321,'' to indicate that ``the tires were manufactured in calendar
week 33 of calendar year 2021.'' Other than the incorrect date code,
Hercules states that the TIN is correct and the subject tires
``otherwise conform to the performance requirements applicable to
specialty trailer tires.''
    Hercules claims that the subject noncompliance ``will not confuse
or mislead the consumer,'' and is similar to prior inconsequentiality
petitions that NHTSA has granted. Although the numeric symbols
representing the date code in the TIN were transposed, Hercules
believes the subject noncompliance causes ``no increased risk to motor
vehicle safety'' because the incorrect date code represents a future
year of production ``and is so far into the future to be implausible.''
    Hercules contends that NHTSA has stated that its main concern is
the potential safety risk to consumers using an aged tire that is
``beyond the manufacturer's recommended service life, regardless of the
condition of the tire.'' Therefore, Hercules believes that a consumer
using the incorrect date code listed on the subject tires would
determine that the year of production indicated by the date code is
1931 or 2031, which would ``cause a rational consumer to question the
accuracy of the year of manufacture.'' Furthermore, Hercules says that
the guidance provided on NHTSA's website advises that ``tires should be
replaced within 6 to 10 years regardless of treadwear.'' For these
reasons, Hercules says the consumer would not ``be misled into
believing that the tire has a substantial service life ahead of it.''
Hercules also states that ``even if a dealer were to store the subject
tires for several years before selling them, there is no risk of
misleading the consumer about the age of the tire.''
    In the event of a recall, Hercules states that the subject tires
can be identified through its internal database using the TIN and ``any
consumer communication could include the TIN as it is listed on the
tire sidewall so that consumers could check the recall notification
against the tire sidewall for verification purposes.'' Hercules says
that upon registration of the subject tires, it ``will continue to be
able to isolate and identify the affected tires in its internal systems
as having actually been produced in calendar week 33, calendar year
2021.''
    According to Hercules, the following prior petitions NHTSA has
granted describe noncompliances that are similar to the subject
petition, and therefore, support Hercules's contention that its
petition should be granted:
     Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, 86 FR 47726 (August 26,
2021).
     Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., Grant of Petition, 71 FR 4396
(January 26, 2006).
     Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., Grant of Petition, 66 FR
45076 (August 27, 2001).
     Bridgestone/Firestone Grant of Inconsequentiality
Petition, 64 FR 20,090 (May 28, 1999).
     Cooper Tire & Rubber Co., Grant of Inconsequentiality
Petition, 68 FR 16,115 (April 2, 2003).
     See Bridgestone/Firestone North America, LLC, Grant of
Inconsequentiality Petition, 71 FR 4396 (January 26, 2006).
    Hercules concludes by stating its belief that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety
and its petition to be exempted from providing notification of the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on
this petition only applies to the subject tires that Hercules no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed.
However, any decision on this petition does not relieve tire
distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for
sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of the noncompliant tires under their control after Hercules
notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at 49
CFR 1.95 and 501.8)

Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2022-19515 Filed 9-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 219 (Wednesday, November 15, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52844-52846]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23996]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0528; Product Identifier 2017-NM-028-AD; Amendment
39-19091; AD 2017-22-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes. This AD
was prompted by reports of in-service incidents regarding the loss of
all air data system information provided to the flightcrew. This AD
requires revising the airplane flight manual (AFM) to provide
``Unreliable Airspeed'' procedures to the flightcrew to stabilize the
airplane's airspeed and attitude for continued safe flight and landing.
We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective December 20, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of December 20,
2017.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 514-855-
7401; email: [email protected]; Internet: http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this referenced service information at
the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0528.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0528; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, 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: Assata Dessaline, Aerospace Engineer,
Avionics and Administrative Services Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch,
1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone: 516-228-
7301; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Bombardier, Inc.,
Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604 Variant) airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on June 5, 2017 (82 FR 25746) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM
was prompted by reports of in-service incidents regarding the loss of
all air data system information provided to the flightcrew. The NPRM
proposed to require revising the AFM to provide ``Unreliable Airspeed''
procedures to the flightcrew to stabilize the airplane's airspeed and
attitude for continued safe flight and landing. We are issuing this AD
to provide the flightcrew with procedures for ``Unreliable Airspeed''
that stabilize the airplane's airspeed and attitude for continued safe
flight and landing.
    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2017-01, dated January 6, 2017 (referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an
unsafe condition for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-
604 Variant) airplanes. The MCAI states:

    A number of in-service incidents have been reported on CL-600-
2C10 aeroplanes regarding a loss of all air data information
provided to the crew. The air data information was recovered as the
aeroplane descended to lower altitudes. An investigation determined
that the root cause in both events was high altitude icing (ice
crystal contamination). If not recognized and addressed, this
condition may affect continued safe flight and landing.
    Due to similarities in the air data systems, similar events
could happen on Bombardier Inc. CL-600-2B16 aeroplanes.
    This [Canadian] AD mandates the incorporation of Aircraft Flight
Manual (AFM) procedures to guide the crew to stabilize the
aeroplanes airspeed and attitude for continued safe flight and
landing.

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0528.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comment received.

Request To Clarify Introduction of ``Unreliable Airspeed'' AFM
Procedures

    The commenter, Marjolaine Bourget, stated that the ``unreliable
airspeed'' procedures, while provided in the AFM revisions identified
in the proposed requirements, were actually introduced in the previous
revision of the identified AFMs.
    From this statement, we infer that the commenter was requesting
that we add a statement that the ``unreliable airspeed'' procedures
were introduced in the previous revision of the identified AFMs. The
commenter provided no justification for this request. We acknowledge
that the ``unreliable airspeed'' procedures were introduced in an
earlier revision of the identified AFMs. We have revised this AD by
adding new paragraph (h) to this AD that provides credit to operators
for previously completing the actions required by paragraph (g) of this
AD if they used the applicable previous AFM revision.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD as proposed, except for minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier, Inc., has issued Unreliable Airspeed, of Section 03-15,
Instruments System, of Chapter 3, Emergency Procedures, of the
following AFMs:

     Bombardier Challenger 604 AFM, Publication No. CH 604 AFM,
Revision 103, dated November 28, 2016.
     Bombardier Challenger 605 AFM, Publication No. CH 605 AFM,
Revision 41, dated November 28, 2016.
     Bombardier Challenger 650 AFM, Publication No. CH 650 AFM,
Revision 6, dated November 28, 2016.
    This service information provides revisions to the Emergency
Procedures section of the AFM to incorporate a procedure for
``Unreliable Airspeed.'' These documents are distinct since they apply
to different airplane configurations. 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

    We estimate that this AD affects 128 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We also estimate that it takes about 1 work-hour per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of
this AD on U.S. operators to be $10,880, or $85 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. ``Subtitle VII: Aviation
Programs,'' describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's
authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
``Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to
the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that 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. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2017-22-11 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-19091; Docket No. FAA-
2017-0528; Product Identifier 2017-NM-028-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective December 20, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (CL-604
Variant) airplanes, certificated in any category; serial numbers
5301 through 5665 inclusive; 5701 through 5988 inclusive; and 6050
through 6080 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 34, Navigation.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of in-service incidents
regarding the loss of all air data system information provided to
the flightcrew. We are issuing this AD to provide the flightcrew
with procedures for ``Unreliable Airspeed'' that stabilize the
airplane's airspeed and attitude for continued safe flight and
landing.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Revision of the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM)

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD: Revise the
Emergency Procedures section of the AFM to include the information
in Unreliable Airspeed, of Section 03-15, Instruments System, of
Chapter 3, Emergency Procedures, of the applicable AFM specified in
paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), or (g)(3) of this AD. These revisions
incorporate a procedure for ``Unreliable Airspeed.'' Thereafter,
operate the airplane according to the limitation and procedure in
the applicable revision.
    (1) For airplanes having serial numbers 5301 through 5665
inclusive: Bombardier Challenger 604 AFM, Publication No. CH 604
AFM, Revision 103, dated November 28, 2016.
    (2) For airplanes having serial numbers 5701 through 5988
inclusive (marketing designation--Challenger 605): Bombardier
Challenger 605 AFM, Publication No. CH 605 AFM, Revision 41, dated
November 28, 2016.
    (3) For airplanes having serial numbers 6050 through 6080
inclusive (marketing designation--Challenger 650): Bombardier
Challenger 650 AFM, Publication No. CH 650 AFM, Revision 6, dated
November 28, 2016.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using the applicable AFM revision
specified in paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes having serial numbers 5301 through 5665
inclusive: Bombardier Challenger 604 AFM, Publication No. CH 604
AFM, Revision 102, dated August 30, 2016.
    (2) For airplanes having serial numbers 5701 through 5988
inclusive (marketing designation--Challenger 605): Bombardier
Challenger 605 AFM, Publication No. CH 605 AFM, Revision 40, dated
August 30, 2016.
    (3) For airplanes having serial numbers 6050 through 6080
inclusive (marketing designation--Challenger 650): Bombardier
Challenger 650 AFM, Publication No. CH 650 AFM, Revision 5, dated
August 30, 2016.

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO 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 certification office, send it to ATTN: Program
Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch,
1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone: 516-
228-7300; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before using any approved AMOC, notify
your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district
office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or
Bombardier Inc.'s TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If
approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized
signature.

(j) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2017-01, dated January 6,
2017, for related information for related information. This MCAI may
be found in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2017-0528.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Assata
Dessaline, Aerospace Engineer, Avionics and Administrative Services
Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (k)(3) and (k)(4) of this AD.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) 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 this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Bombardier Challenger 604 Airplane Flight Manual (AFM),
Publication No. CH 604 AFM, Revision 103, dated November 28, 2016.
    (ii) Bombardier Challenger 605 AFM, Publication No. CH 605 AFM,
Revision 41, dated November 28, 2016.
    (iii) Bombardier Challenger 650 AFM, Publication No. CH 650 AFM,
Revision 6, dated November 28, 2016.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval,
Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 514-
855-7401; email: [email protected]; Internet: http://www.bombardier.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. 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, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 20, 2017.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-23996 Filed 11-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P