[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 134 (Friday, July 16, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 37672]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15040]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0176; Airspace Docket No. 21-ACE-8]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; Sioux City, IA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects the final rule published in the Federal
Register on June 11, 2021, amending the Class D and Class E airspace at
Sioux Gateway Airport/Brigadier General Bud Day Field, Sioux City, IA.
The geographic coordinates for Sioux Gateway Airport/Brigadier General
Bud Day Field were incorrectly published as ``(Lat. 42[deg]24'09'' N,
long. 96[deg]23'05'' W)'' vice ``(Lat. 42[deg]24'05'' N, long.
96[deg]23'04'' W)'' in the Class D and Class E airspace legal
descriptions.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, August 12, 2021. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1 Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Order is also available for inspection
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of FAA Order 7400.11E at NARA, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    The FAA published a final rule in the Federal Register (86 FR
31105; June 11, 2021) for Docket No. FAA-2021-0176 amending the Class D
and Class E airspace at Sioux Gateway Airport/Brigadier General Bud Day
Field, Sioux City, IA. Subsequent to publication, the FAA identified
the geographic coordinates for Sioux Gateway Airport/Brigadier General
Bud Day Field were incorrectly published as ``(Lat. 42[deg]24'09'' N,
long. 96[deg]23'05'' W)'' vice ``(Lat. 42[deg]24'05'' N, long.
96[deg]23'04'' W)'' in the Class D and Class E airspace legal
descriptions. This action corrects that error.
    Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in
paragraph 5000, 6002, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.11E
dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15, 2020, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be subsequently
published in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11E, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated July 21, 2020, and effective September 15,
2020. FAA Order 7400.11E is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11E lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

Correction to Final Rule

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Amendment
of Class D and Class E Airspace; Sioux City, IA, published in the
Federal Register of June 11, 2021 (86 FR 31105), Docket No. FAA-2021-
0176, is corrected as follows:

71.1   [Corrected]

0
On page 31107, column 1, line 37, replace ``(lat. 42[deg]24'09''N.,
long. 96[deg]23'05''W.)'' with ``(Lat. 42[deg]24'05'' N, long.
96[deg]23'04'' W)''.

0
On page 31107, column 1, line 63, replace ``(lat. 42[deg]24'09''N.,
long. 96[deg]23'05''W.)'' with ``(Lat. 42[deg]24'05'' N, long.
96[deg]23'04'' W)''.

0
On page 31107, column 2, line 25, replace ``(lat. 42[deg]24'09''N.,
long. 96[deg]23'05''W.)'' with ``(Lat. 42[deg]24'05'' N, long.
96[deg]23'04'' W)''.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 12, 2021.
Martin A. Skinner,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2021-15040 Filed 7-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: November 20, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 225)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 70270-70271]
[DOCID:fr20no08-8]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0817; Airspace Docket No. 08-ANE-101]

Amendment to Class E Airspace; Windsor Locks, Bradley
International Airport, CT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action confirms the effective date of a direct final rule
published in the Federal Register (73 FR 56471) that revises the Class
E Airspace at Windsor Locks, Bradley International Airport, CT (BDL) to
provide for adequate controlled airspace for those aircraft using
Instrument Approach Procedures previously defined using the CHUPP NDB.
The CHUPP NDB has been decommissioned, and after evaluation of the
extension to the Windsor Locks Class C airspace, the FAA determined
that the Class E3 airspace should be retained and extended 1 mile to
provide adequate controlled airspace for the Instrument Approach
Procedures to BDL. In addition, this action corrects a minor error made
in the Airspace Designation.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, November 20, 2008. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melinda Giddens, Operations Support
Group, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta,
Georgia 30320; Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Confirmation of Effective Date

    The FAA published this direct final rule with a request for
comments in the Federal Register on September 29 (73 FR 56471) amending
Class E3 airspace at Windsor Locks, Bradley International Airport, CT
(BDL) to provide for adequate controlled airspace for those aircraft
using Instrument Approach Procedures to the airport. The FAA uses the
direct final rulemaking procedure for a non-controversial rule where
the FAA believes that there will be no adverse public comment. This
direct final rule advised the public that no adverse comments were
anticipated, and that unless a written adverse comment, or a written
notice of intent to submit such an adverse comment, were received
within the comment period, the regulation would become effective on
November 20, 2008. No adverse comments were received, and thus this
notice confirms that effective date.

Correction to Final Rule

    After publication, it was observed that a grammatical correction
was required to correct the Airspace Designation. Therefore, in the
Federal Register Docket No. FAA-2008-0817; Airspace Docket No. 08-ANE-
101, published on September 29, 2008, (73 FR 56471) make the following
correction. On page 56473, in the first column, in the Airspace
Designation correct the State identifier (currently CTA) to read
``CT''.
    For verification and to avoid confusion, the entire description
should read as follows:

Paragraph 6003 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension.

* * * * *

ANE CT E3 Windsor Locks, CT [Revised]

Windsor Locks, Bradley International Airport, CT,
    (Lat. 41[deg]56'20'' N., long 72[deg]41'00'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 3.2 miles
each side of the 224 bearing from the Bradley International Airport
(BDL) and extending from the 5 mile radius to 9.6 miles SW of the
Bradley International Airport. The Class E airspace area is
effective during specific dates and times established in advance by
a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be
continuously published in the Airport/Facility directory.
* * * * *

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on October 29, 2008.
    Signed by:
Barry A. Knight,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
 [FR Doc. E8-27536 Filed 11-19-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 98 (Tuesday, May 23, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23512-23514]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10255]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9439; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-170-AD;
Amendment 39-18870; AD 2017-09-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
The Boeing Company Model 787-8 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a
report indicating that during an airplane inspection in production, the
variable frequency starter generator (VFSG) power feeder cables were
found to contain terminal lugs incorrectly installed common to terminal
blocks located in the wing front spar. This AD requires a general
visual inspection of the wings, section 16, terminal lugs at the
terminal power block of the VFSG power feeder cable for correct
installation and applicable corrective actions. We are issuing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective June 27, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of June 27,
2017.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740-5600; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service information
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9439.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
9439; 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 address for the Docket Office (phone: 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: Brendan Shanley, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-
3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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 The Boeing Company
Model 787-8 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on
December 16, 2016 (81 FR 91066) (``the NPRM''). The NPRM was prompted
by a report indicating that during an airplane inspection in
production, the VFSG power feeder cables were found to contain terminal
lugs incorrectly installed common to terminal blocks located in the
wing front spar. The NPRM proposed to require a general visual
inspection of the wings, section 16, terminal lugs at the terminal
power block of the VFSG power feeder cable for correct installation and
applicable corrective actions. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct incorrectly installed terminal lugs which may contact adjacent
structure and be damaged. Damaged terminal lugs could cause the
potential loss of several functions essential for safe flight or
electrical arcing in a flammable leakage zone, which could result in an
electrical short and the possible introduction of energy into the main
fuel tanks.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and
the FAA's response to each comment.

Support for the NPRM

    The Air Line Pilots Association, International, expressed support
for the NPRM.

Request To Revise Compliance Time

    Boeing and All Nippon Airways (ANA) requested that we revise the
compliance time specified in paragraph (g) of the proposed AD. Boeing
stated that paragraph (g) of the proposed AD refers to paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB240027-
00, Issue 002, dated September 6, 2016 (``ASB B787-81205-SB240027-00,
Issue 002'') and requested that we instead refer to paragraph 5.,
``Compliance,'' of ASB B787-81205-SB240027-00, Issue 002'' because that
is the correct location for the applicable times. ANA stated that
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' doesn't exist in ASB B787-81205-
SB240027-00, Issue 002, and recommended a compliance time of ``within
12 months after the effective date of this AD.'' Boeing also
recommended that the compliance time be tied to the effective date of
the AD to allow operators a valid and acceptable time frame to perform
the actions specified in ASB B787-81205-SB240027-00, Issue 002.
Additionally, the commenters stated that the compliance time ``within
12 months after the original issue date of this service bulletin,'' as
specified in ASB B787-81205-SB240027-00, Issue 002, would put operators
out of compliance upon AD issuance.
    We agree with the commenters. We have revised paragraph (g) of this
AD to specify ``Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD''
and have removed reference to paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of ASB
B787-81205-SB240027-00, Issue 002. We have determined that extending
the compliance time from what was proposed will provide an acceptable
level of safety.

Request To Clarify the Unsafe Condition Statement

    Boeing requested that we revise the ``Discussion'' section of the
NPRM and paragraph (e) of the proposed AD to remove information about
the potential to introduce energy into the main fuel tanks and include
information about

potential loss of systems. Boeing stated that ``introduction of energy
into the fuel tank'' is possible but doesn't fully describe the unsafe
condition. Boeing noted that the ``BACKGROUND'' and ``REASON''
statements of ASB B787-81205-SB240027-00, Issue 002, specifically
include information that the unsafe condition is due to the ``potential
loss of several functions essential for safe flight.''
    We agree that clarification of the unsafe condition statement is
necessary. We have revised the ``Discussion'' section of this final
rule, and paragraph (e) of this AD to state that the unsafe condition
is due to the ``potential loss of several functions essential for safe
flight.'' However, we have not removed information about the potential
to introduce energy into the main fuel tanks, because that information
also describes the potential unsafe condition.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and 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.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this AD.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed ASB B787-81205-SB240027-00, Issue 002. The service
information describes procedures for a general visual inspection of the
right and left wing, section 16, VFSG power feeder cable terminal lugs
for correct installation and corrective actions. 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 6 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
               Action                         Labor cost            Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.........................  8 work-hours x $85 per hour              $0            $680          $4,080
                                      = $680.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repairs that
will be required based on the results of the inspection. We have no way
of determining the number of aircraft that might need these repairs:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rework wing terminal lugs..................  9 work-hours x $85 per hour = $765               $0            $765
                                              \1\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Labor costs are specific to each wing (left or right.)

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    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 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):

2017-09-08 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18870; Docket No. FAA-
2016-9439; Directorate Identifier 2016-NM-170-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective June 27, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 787-8 airplanes,
certificated in any category, as identified in Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin B787-81205-SB240027-00, Issue 002, dated September 6, 2016
(``ASB B787-81205-SB240027-00, Issue 002'').

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 24, Electrical
power.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report indicating that during an
airplane inspection in production, the variable frequency starter
generator (VFSG) power feeder cables were found to contain terminal
lugs incorrectly installed common to terminal blocks located in the
wing front spar; the lugs were close to the structure causing the
lug sleeve to come in contact with adjacent fasteners. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct incorrectly installed terminal
lugs which may contact adjacent structure and be damaged. Damaged
terminal lugs could cause the potential loss of several functions
essential for safe flight or electrical arcing in a flammable
leakage zone, which could result in an electrical short and the
possible introduction of energy into the main fuel tanks.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection of Terminal Lugs and Corrective Actions

    Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, do a
general visual inspection of the right and left wing, section 16,
VFSG power feeder cable terminal lugs at the terminal block for
correct installation and do all applicable corrective actions, in
accordance with ASB B787-81205-SB240027-00, Issue 002. Do all
applicable corrective actions before further flight.

(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 Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-
81205-SB240027-00, Issue 001, dated January 21, 2014.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (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.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. To be approved, the
repair method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must
meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Brendan Shanley,
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA,
Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) 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 the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin B787-81205-SB240027-00, Issue
002, dated September 6, 2016.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data
Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA
90740-5600; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (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 April 27, 2017.
Paul Bernado,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-10255 Filed 5-22-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 186 (Monday, September 26, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 59482]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24574]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2000-8089]

Petition for Waivers of Compliance

    In accordance with Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
Sections 211.9 and 211.41, notice is hereby given that the Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA) has received a request for a modification
of an existing waiver of compliance with certain requirements of the
Federal safety laws and regulations. The petition is described below,
including the party seeking relief, the regulatory provisions involved,
and the nature of the relief being requested, and the petitioner's
arguments in favor of relief. Canadian National Railway Company (CN)
seeks to modify an existing waiver in Docket Number FRA-2000-8089 on
behalf of itself and its U.S. affiliates.
    CN is North America's fifth largest railroad; with 20,600 route
miles and approximately 22,000 employees in Canada and the United
States. It operates the largest rail network in Canada and the only
transcontinental network in North America. Within the last 15 years, CN
has carried out extremely successful integrations with the Illinois
Central, Wisconsin Central, Great Lakes Transportation, and Elgin,
Joliet & Eastern rail systems. CN seeks to modify an existing waiver in
which FRA has waived compliance with 49 CFR part 231, which specifies
the number, location, and dimensional specifications for handholds,
ladders, sill steps, uncoupling levers, and handbrakes; and which
regulates drawbar height, for CN's use of RoadRailer equipment.
    The original CN waiver to operate RoadRailer equipment was issued
by FRA on May 23, 2001, and was extended on August 17, 2011. Subsequent
to the most recent extension of the current waiver in force, CN
received a request from a customer to extend the number of RoadRailer
units handled by its operation. Basically, CN is requesting a
modification to the current waiver, which would grant CN the same
operational capability and limitations as provided to Norfolk Southern
Railway to operate RoadRailer equipment by FRA in Docket Number FRA-
2002-11896. Since having the waiver granted in 2001, CN has operated
RoadRailer equipment without incident.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket numbers, and may be submitted by any of the
following methods:
     Web Site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by November 10, 2011 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the document (or signing the
document, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review the U.S. Department of Transportation's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Page 19477), at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 19, 2011.
Robert C. Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2011-24574 Filed 9-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register: August 27, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 167)]
[Notices]
[Page 50605]
[DOCID:fr27au08-28]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13247-000]

Natural Currents Energy Services, LLC; Notice of Preliminary
Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions
to Intervene, and Competing Applications

August 20, 2008.
    On June 27, 2008 and supplemented on August 12, 2008, Natural
Currents Energy Services, LLC filed an application, pursuant to section
4(f) of the Federal Power Act, proposing to study the feasibility of
the Kingsbridge Marina Tidal Energy Project, located on the Manasquan
River in Ocean County, New Jersey. The project uses no dam or
impoundment.
    The proposed project would consist of: (1) 2 Tidal In-Stream Energy
Conversion (TISEC) generating units, with a total installed capacity of
40-kilowatts, (2) an underwater cable approximately 100 foot in length,
and (3) appurtenant facilities. The project is estimated to have an
annual generation of 300-megawatt-hours, which would be sold to the
Kingsbridge Financial Group, Inc.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Roger Bason, Natural Currents Energy
Services, LLC, 24 Roxanne Boulevard, Highland, New York 12561, (845)
691-4009.
    FERC Contact: Kelly Houff<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. If unable to be filed electronically,
documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and eight
copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. For
more information on how to submit these types of filings please go to
the Commission's Web site located at http://www.ferc.gov/filing-
comments.asp. More information about this project can be viewed or
printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of Commission's Web site at http://
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P-
13247) in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-19810 Filed 8-26-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 233 (Thursday, December 3, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 78002-78005]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26005]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0569; FRL-10015-57]

Adipic Acid; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of Adipic acid when used as an inert
ingredient in antimicrobial pesticide formulations applied to food-
contact surfaces in public eating places, dairy-processing equipment,
and food-processing equipment and utensils at an end-use concentration
not to exceed 100 parts per million (ppm). Ecolab, Inc. submitted a
petition to EPA under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
requesting establishment of an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for adipic acid. This regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level for residues of adipic acid when
used in accordance with this exemption.

DATES: This regulation is effective December 3, 2020. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 1, 2020,
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0569, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is closed to visitors with
limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer
service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status
information on EPA/DC services and docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marietta Echeverria, Registration
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR
part 180 through the Government Publishing Office's e-CFR site at
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file
an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0569 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
February 1, 2020. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0569, by one of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be CBI or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Petition for Exemption

    In the Federal Register of May 29, 2020 (85 FR 32338) (FRL-10009-
84), EPA issued a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C.
346a, announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP IN-11317) by
Ecolab, Inc., 655 Lone Oak Drive, Eagan, MN 55121. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.940(a) be amended by establishing an
exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of adipic
acid when used as an inert ingredient at an upper limit of 100 ppm in
antimicrobial pesticide formulations applied to food-contact surfaces
in public eating places, dairy-processing equipment, and food-
processing equipment and utensils. That document referenced a summary
of the petition prepared by Ecolab, Inc., the petitioner, which is
available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. One comment was
received on the notice of filing. EPA's response to this comment is
discussed in Unit V.B.

III. Inert Ingredient Definition

    Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125 and include, but are not
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a
pesticidal efficacy of their own): Solvents such as alcohols and
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents;
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
Generally, EPA has exempted inert ingredients from the requirement of a
tolerance based on the low toxicity of the individual inert
ingredients.

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the exemption is ``safe.'' Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the FFDCA
defines ``safe'' to mean that EPA has determined that ``there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but it does not include occupational exposure.
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide
chemical residue in establishing an exemption and to ``ensure that
there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue.''
    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no harm to human health. In order
to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide inert
ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the inert in
conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert ingredient
through food, drinking water, and through other exposures that occur as
a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA is able to
determine that a tolerance is not necessary to ensure that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure
to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure to adipic acid, including exposure
resulting from the exemption established by this action. EPA's
assessment of exposures and risks associated with adipic acid follows.

A. Toxicological Profile

    EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered their
validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of
the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and
children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature
of the adverse effects caused by adipic acid in these toxicity studies
are discussed in this unit.
    Available acute toxicity studies on adipic acid include various
oral, dermal, and inhalation studies which showed low toxicity.
Multiple dermal and eye irritation studies, and a dermal sensitization
study, indicated that adipic acid is not a dermal irritant and does not
cause skin sensitization. Adipic acid is an eye irritant. In available
repeat dose studies, which were up to two years in duration, no adverse
effects of treatment were seen below the limit dose of 1,000 mg/kg/day.
In addition, there was no evidence of carcinogenicity or
neuropathological changes or effects reported in any of the studies.
Adipic acid was not found to be genotoxic in various in vitro and in
vivo studies.
    All studies showed low acute and repeat dose toxicity, and no
reproductive/developmental toxicity was seen in any of the species
tested. The primary systemic health effect associated with adipic acid
is irritation of the intestinal mucosa and decreased body weight after
exposures to concentrations >2,000 mg/kg/day.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    No toxicological endpoint of concern for adipic acid has been
identified in the database.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food, feed uses, and drinking water. In
evaluating dietary exposure to adipic acid, EPA considered exposure
under the current and proposed use patterns. Dietary exposure to adipic
acid may occur from eating foods containing adipic acid (found
naturally or as a food additive) or eating food that comes in contact
with surfaces treated with pesticide formulations containing this inert
ingredient. In addition, exposure through drinking water is also
possible. However, no toxicological endpoint of concern was identified
for adipic acid below the limit dose and therefore a quantitative
assessment of dietary exposure is not necessary.

    2. Non-dietary exposure. The term ``residential exposure'' is used
in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure
(e.g., textiles (clothing and diapers), carpets, swimming pools, and
hard surface disinfection on walls, floors, and tables). Residential
exposure to adipic acid may occur based on its use as an inert
ingredient in pesticide formulations registered for residential uses.
Additional non-dietary exposure may occur from the use of adipic acid
in pharmaceutical products and cosmetics. However, no toxicological
endpoint of concern was identified below the limit dose for adipic acid
and therefore a quantitative residential exposure assessment for adipic
acid was not conducted.
    3. Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke an exemption, the
Agency consider ``available information'' concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide's residues and ``other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.''
    EPA has not found adipic acid to share a common mechanism of
toxicity with any other substances, and adipic acid does not appear to
produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this action, therefore, EPA has assumed that adipic acid
does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For
information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a
common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of
such chemicals, see EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    Section 408(b)(2)(C) of the FFDCA requires EPA to apply an
additional tenfold margin of safety in the case of threshold effects to
ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to
infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue. As noted in Unit IV.B., there is no indication of threshold
effects being caused by adipic acid. Therefore, this requirement does
not apply to the present analysis. Moreover, due to the lack of any
toxicological endpoints of concern, EPA conducted a qualitative
assessment of adipic acid, which does not use safety factors for
assessing risk.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    Taking into consideration all available information on adipic acid,
EPA has determined that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm to
the general population or any population subgroup, including infants
and children, will result from aggregate exposure to adipic acid
residues. Therefore, the establishment of an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance under 40 CFR 180.940(a) for residues of
adipic acid when used as an inert ingredient in antimicrobial pesticide
formulations applied to food-contact surfaces in public eating places,
dairy-processing equipment, and food-processing equipment and utensils
at a maximum end-use concentration of 100 ppm, is safe under FFDCA
section 408.

V. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is not establishing a numerical tolerance for residues of
adipic acid in or on any food commodities. EPA is establishing a
limitation on the amount of adipic acid that may be used in
antimicrobial pesticide formulations applied to food-contact surfaces
in public eating places, dairy-processing equipment, and food-
processing equipment and utensils. This limitation will be enforced
through the pesticide registration process under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (``FIFRA''), 7 U.S.C. 136
et seq. EPA will not register any antimicrobial pesticide formulation
applied to food-contact surfaces in public eating places, dairy-
processing equipment, and food-processing equipment and utensils
pesticide formulation that exceeds an end-use concentration of adipic
acid of 100 ppm.

B. Response to Comments

    One comment was received in response to the notice of filing
associated with this action; however, the comment was unrelated to
adipic acid and is not relevant to this action.

VI. Conclusions

    Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established under 40 CFR 180.940(a) for residues of adipic acid (CAS
Reg. No. 124-04-9) when used as an inert ingredient in antimicrobial
pesticide formulations applied to food-contact surfaces in public
eating places, dairy-processing equipment, and food-processing
equipment and utensils at an end-use concentration not to exceed 100
ppm.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition
submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order
12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this action has been exempted from review
under Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), nor is it considered a regulatory action under
Executive Order 13771, entitled ``Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs'' (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017). This action does not
contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it
require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898,
entitled ``Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the exemption in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
Tribal Governments, on the relationship between the National Government
and the States or Tribal Governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and

Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this action does not
impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as
described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2
U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VIII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 6, 2020.
Marietta Echeverria,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40
CFR chapter I as follows:

PART 180-- TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL
RESIDUES IN FOOD

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

0
2. In Sec.  180.940 amend the table in paragraph (a) by adding
alphabetically the entry ``Adipic acid'' to read as follows:

Sec.  180.940   Tolerance exemptions for active and inert ingredients
for use in antimicrobial formulations (Food-contact surface sanitizing
solutions).

* * * * *
    (a) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Pesticide chemical                     CAS Reg. No.                           Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Adipic acid.............................  124-04-9...................  When ready for use, the end-use
                                                                        concentration is not to exceed 100 ppm.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-26005 Filed 12-2-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 12 (Tuesday, January 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2690-2691]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00728]

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

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: RP15-266-000.
    Applicants: Bear Creek Storage Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Annual Fuel Assessment Report of Bear Creek Storage
Company, L.L.C.
    Filed Date: 12/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20141217-5143.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/12/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-315-000.
    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) rate filing per 154.204: BUG Ramapo Jan2015
Release to Platinum Energy to be effective 1/7/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150107-5059.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/20/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-317-000.
    Applicants: Enable Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rate
Filing--January 2015--LER 0222 Att A to be effective 1/7/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150107-5129.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/20/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-318-000.
    Applicants: Enable Mississippi River Transmission, L.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rate
Filing to Amend LER 5680's Attachment A_1-7-15 to be effective 1/7/
2015.
    Filed Date: 1/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150107-5194.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/20/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-319-000.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) rate filing per 154.204: 20150107
Negotiated Rate to be effective 1/8/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150107-5215.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/20/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-320-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) rate filing per 154.204: 01/07/15
Negotiated Rates--ConEdison Energy Inc. (HUB) 2275-89 to be effective
1/6/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150107-5221.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/20/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-321-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) rate filing per 154.204: 01/07/15
Negotiated Rates--Trafigura AG (HUB) 7445-89 Revised to be effective 1/
6/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150107-5222.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/20/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-322-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) rate filing per 154.204: 01/07/15
Negotiated Rates--Mercuria Energy Gas Trading LLC (HUB) 7540-89 to be
effective 1/6/2015.
    Filed Date: 1/7/15.
    Accession Number: 20150107-5229.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/20/15.

    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: January 8, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-00728 Filed 1-16-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 170 (Tuesday, September 3, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54369-54370]
[FR Doc No: 2013-21307]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2012-0107; Notice 2]

The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, Mootness of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Petition Mootness.

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

SUMMARY: The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (Goodyear),\1\ has
determined that certain Goodyear brand tires manufactured between April
8, 2012 and May 12, 2012, do not fully comply with paragraph
S5.5(c)&(d) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 139,
New Pneumatic Radial Tires for Light Vehicles. Goodyear has filed an
appropriate report dated July 20, 2012, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company is a manufacturer of
tires and is registered under the laws of the state of Ohio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) (see implementing rule
at 49 CFR part 556), Goodyear submitted a petition for an exemption
from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301
on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety. Notice of receipt of Goodyear's petition was published,
with a 30-day public comment period, on December 3, 2012, in the
Federal Register (77 FR 71678). One comment was received from Goodyear
stating that after further review it now believes that it filed the
petition in error because the described condition is not a

noncompliance. To view the petition and all supporting documents log
onto the Federal Docket Management System Web site at: http://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online search instructions to
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
locate docket number ``NHTSA-2012-0107.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on this
decision, contact Mr. Abraham Diaz, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Tires Involved: Affected are approximately 1,692 Goodyear Wrangler
AT/S, size LT 275/65R18 brand tires manufactured between April 8, 2012,
and May 12, 2012 at its plant in Gadsden, Alabama.
    Summary of Goodyear's Analyses: Goodyear's original analysis
contended that there was a noncompliance with 49 CFR 571.139 paragraph
S5.5(c)&(d) because the subject tires were labeled ``LR-E/Max Load 3415
lbs Max Pressure 80 psi'' instead of Goodyear's intended label ``LR-C/
Max Load 2535 lbs Max Pressure 50 psi.''
    Goodyear also asserted that the perceived noncompliance was
inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety for the following
reasons:
    1. The subject tires meet or exceed all applicable FMVSS
performance standards for a tire labeled as either load range ``E'' or
``C''.
    2. All other markings related to tire service (load capacity,
corresponding inflation pressure, etc[hellip]) are also correct for the
mislabeled tires.
    3. The subject tires are identical to the intended LR-C tire with
the exception of the sidewall labeling, and therefore, do not present a
safety concern.
    Goodyear has additionally informed NHTSA that it has corrected
future production and that all other tire labeling information is
correct.
    In the comment that Goodyear posted to the petition docket, it
contends that after further research that it now believes that a
noncompliance does not exist.
    In summation, Goodyear now states that its original determination
that there is a noncompliance in the subject tires as described in the
subject petition was in error and that its petition, to exempt it from
providing recall notification of noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C.
30118 and remedying the recall noncompliance as required by 49 U.S.C.
30120 was unnecessary.
    NHTSA Decision: Inconsequential noncompliance petitions filed under
49 CFR Part 556 are valid only in situations where there is a
noncompliance with a Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS.) In
its comment to the petition docket Goodyear explained that it now
believes that the described condition is not a noncompliance. Based on
Goodyear's description of the subject tire labeling issue NHTSA has
determined that, while Goodyear may not have labeled the tires as it
originally intended, the tire sidewall labeling issue described in the
subject petition is not a noncompliance with FMVSS No. 139 because the
tire as labeled conforms to all applicable labeling and performance
requirements of FMVSS No. 139. Therefore, this petition is moot and no
further action on the petition is warranted.

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

    Issued on: August 27, 2013.
Claude H. Harris,
 Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2013-21307 Filed 8-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 225 (Tuesday, November 23, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71453-71454]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29421]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1947-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

South Dakota; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of South Dakota (FEMA-1947-DR), dated November
2, 2010, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: November 2, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated November 2, 2010, the President issued a major disaster
declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the
``Stafford Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of South Dakota resulting from severe storms and flooding during the
period of September 22-23, 2010, is of sufficient severity and
magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C.
5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such
a major disaster exists in the State of South Dakota.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State.
Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance is
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75
percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved

assistance to the extent allowable under the Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Mark A. Neveau, of FEMA is appointed
to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
    The following areas of the State of South Dakota have been
designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Brookings, Lake, Moody, and Union Counties, and the Flandreau
Santee Sioux Tribe for Public Assistance.
    All counties and Tribes within the State of South Dakota are
eligible to apply for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-29421 Filed 11-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


March 28, 2002

Esteban Mujica Cotto, Esq.

President

Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board

P.O. Box 11488

San Juan, Puerto Rico  00910-1488

Dear Mr. Cotto:

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has completed its review
of the revisions to the Puerto Rico Water Quality Standards Regulation
(PRWQSR) under Resolution Number 90-26-1.  These revisions, except for
the required certification of the Commonwealth(s Secretary of Justice
(Attorney General), were sent to EPA by the Puerto Rico Environmental
Quality Board (PREQB) on September 21, 1990.  These revisions were
adopted by the Commonwealth and became effective on October 27, 1990.
In taking this action, EPA considered the following documents submitted
in connection with the revised PRWQSR:

the certification from the Commonwealth(s Secretary of Justice Ms.
Anabelle Rodriguez (Attorney General) that the standards were duly
adopted pursuant to Commonwealth law, such certification dated January
8, 2002 and submitted to EPA on February 25, 2002;

the applicable notices from the El Nuevo dia and the San Juan Star
(dated February 24, 1990, February 25, 1990, March 9, 1990, March 10,
1990, and September 15, 1990).

Responsiveness Summary to the comments received during public hearings
on  May 2 and 3, 1990 and July 12 and 13, 1990 (dated October 2, 1990).

Under Section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. ( 1313(c),
states are required to conduct a triennial review of their water quality
standards and submit any new or revised standards to EPA for review.
Federal regulations at 40 C.F.R. (( 131.21 and 131.22 implement these
requirements.  Puerto Rico(s previous review and revision of its water
quality standards regulations were completed and adopted November 5,
1987.  As part of the 1990 review process, PREQB held four public
hearings to receive public input and comment on the

proposed revisions to the PRWQSR on May 2 and 3, 1990 and July 12 and
13, 1990.  EPA did not receive the Attorney General(s certification
required under 40 CFR 131.6(e) until February 25, 2002.   EPA considers
the adoption of revisions to the PRWQSR, along with the public review
and comment process, to constitute the Commonwealth(s triennial review
of water quality standards.  Based on our review, PREQB(s procedures are
consistent with, and satisfy the procedural requirements of 40 C.F.R. (
131.20.

The following constitute the revisions which are being addressed under
this action.  These revisions enhance the Puerto Rico water quality
standards, and represent improvements in the PRWQSR.

revisions to the Puerto Rico antidegradation policy, which are approved
as being  consistent with the requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.12;

the adoption of several new and revised definitions (Article 1), which
are approved as being consistent with the requirements under 40 C.F.R. (
131.3;

the inclusion of wetlands in the definition of (Waters of Puerto Rico(
(Article 1), which is approved as being consistent with the requirements
under 40 C.F.R. ( 122.2;

revisions to further clarify the geographic applicability of the water
body classifications in Puerto Rico (Classes SA, SB, SC, SD, SE and SG)
(Article 2.1 - 2.3), which are approved as being consistent with the
requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.6(a) and, 40 C.F.R. ( 131.10(a);

the revision of the narrative criteria for (solids and other matter,(
and  (color, odor, taste and turbidity( (Articles 3.1.1 and 3.1.2) to
specify the protection of existing and designated uses, which are
approved as being consistent with the requirements under 40 C.F.R. (
131.6(c) and, 40 C.F.R. ( 131.11(a);

the revision of the ambient temperature criterion (Article 3.1.4 (A)) to
lower the highest allowable temperature from 94o F to 90oF, which is
approved as being  consistent with the requirements under 40 C.F.R. (
131.6(c) and, 40 C.F.R. ( 131.11(a);

the adoption of narrative criteria for (biochemical oxygen demand( and
(oil and grease( (Articles 3.1.6 and 3.1.8), which are approved as being
consistent with the requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.6(c) and, 40
C.F.R. ( 131.11(a);

the revision of the narrative criteria for (substances in toxic
concentrations and synergistic toxic effects( (Article 3.1.9) to include
synergistic effects, which is approved as being consistent with the
requirements under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.6(c) and, 40 C.F.R. ( 131.11(a);

the adoption of new or revised chemical-specific numeric criteria for
the following toxic pollutants in (surface waters:(cadmium, copper,
lead, nickel, aldrin, dieldrin, chlordane, DDT and metabolites,
endosulfan, endrin, lindane, toxaphene, chloropyrifos, 2,4-D, parathion
and dichlorobenzenes (Articles 3.1.9(A),(B) and (C)), which are approved
as being consistent with the requirements under 40 C.F.R. (131.11;

the adoption of  new or revised chemical-specific numeric criteria for
the following toxic pollutants in (coastal/estuarine waters:( aldrin,
dieldrin, chlordane, DDT and metabolites, endosulfan, endrin, lindane,
toxaphene, chloropyrifos and dichlorobenzenes  (Articles 3.1.9(A),(B)
and (C)), which are approved as being consistent with the requirements
under 40 C.F.R. (131.11; and,

the revision of the color criterion for Class SD waters from 10 to 15
units according to the colorimetric platinum-cobalt standard (Article
3.2.4.B.4), which is approved as being consistent with the requirements
under 40 C.F.R. ( 131.6(c) and, 40 C.F.R. ( 131.11(a).

By this letter, I am pleased to approve the above revisions to the
PRWQSR, pursuant to Section 303(c) of the CWA.  I am also approving the
temporary exemption provisions in Article 9 of PRWQSR.  This latter
approval is based in part on the March 15, 2002 letter from  Ms. Ivonne
Santiago, Director of the Water Quality  Area, tc \l1 "Water Quality
Area,  to Ms. Kathleen C. Callahan, Director of the  Division of
Environmental Planning and Protection.  In this letter PREQB stated that
any approval by the Commonwealth of a temporary exemption (variance)
will comply with the following terms and conditions: (1) the application
will contain a justification for the requested  variance consistent with
40 C.F.R. ( 131.10(g)(6), that the costs necessary to comply with the
relevant water quality standard(s) would result in substantial economic
and social impacts; (2) the variance shall be adopted only after
completion of a public participation process, in conformity with Puerto
Rican law and/or regulation, as would apply to any revision to the
PRWQSR; (3) the variance shall be submitted for  EPA review and approval
as a change to water quality standards before it may take effect (40 CFR
131.21); and (4) if approved, the variance shall be published in the
PRWQSR.  Publication of a temporary, case-by-case variance in the PRWQSR
may occur during the following update or printing of the PRWQSR. Also, I
note that such variances will be implemented only in the context of a
NPDES permit action, and that EPA is at present the permitting authority
for NPDES permit issuance in Puerto Rico.  In issuing NPDES permits in
Puerto Rico, EPA intends to exercise such authority only upon compliance
with all of the above four elements. Finally, it is my understanding
that PREQB has included all of EPA(s requested changes to Article 9 in
its February 2002 proposed revisions to the PRWQSR.  Once PREQB has
officially adopted these revisions and submits them to EPA, we will
review and take action on them.

EPA is not taking action on the criteria for the following substances:
Asbestos (Article 3.1.7); beryllium (Class SD waters), manganese  (Class
SD waters), and nickel (Class SB and SC waters) (Article 3.1.9(A));
pentachlorophenol (Article 3.1.9(B); benzene, vinyl chloride,
1,2-dichloroethane, 1,1-dichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, carbon
tetrachloride, 1,1,1-trichloro-ethane, and tricholoroethylene (Article
3.1.9(C); and, total ammonia (Article 3.2.4(B)(13), since these criteria
were stayed by PREQB on August 17, 1990.  Because these criteria were
stayed, they do not constitute (revised or new( standards subject to
review under section 303(c)(2)(A) of the Clean Water Act.

In addition, EPA is not taking action pursuant to Section 303(c) of the
CWA on Article 10 of the PRWQSR, since this section addresses the
development and implementation of

wasteload allocations (WLAs), which is an implementation provision
related to total maximum daily loads (TMDL) under Section 303(d) of the
CWA, rather than an element of Section 303(c) of the CWA relating to
water quality standards.  EPA(s TMDL staff will work with PREQB staff to
identify and address any remaining concerns related to PREQB(s TMDL/WLA
development and implementation procedures in Article 10 of the PRWQSR.

EPA Region II looks forward to continuing to work with PREQB to further
improve the  PRWQSR.  In a January 14, 2002 letter from Ms. Callahan to
Ms. Santiago, EPA  tc \l1 " EPA  provided PREQB with the results of
EPA(s review of the 2002 draft revisions to the PRWQSR.  Under separate
cover, EPA will identify any further additions, deletions or
modifications which may be required to bring the PRWQSR into full
compliance with the CWA and its implementing regulations.

If you have any questions, please call me at<PHONE_NUMBER> or have your
staff contact Ms. Kathleen C. Callahan, Director, Division of
Environmental Planning and Protection at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Sincerely,

Jane M. Kenny

Regional Administrator

cc:	Ivonne Santiago, PREQB

       	Ruben Gonzalez, PREQB

bcc: 	Jose Font, PREQB

        	Ariel Iglesias, PREQB

       	Carl-Axel Soderberg, CEPD

        	William Morrow, OST

        	Marjorie Pitts, OST

        	M.E. Levine, OGC

Kathleen Callahan, DEPP

        	Kevin Bricke, DEPP

        	Walter Mugdan, ORC

        	Warren Llewellyn, ORC

        	Richard Weisberg, ORC

        	Mario Del Vicario, CEPB

        	Felix Locicero, CEPB

        	Wayne Jackson, CEPB

G:\...\SWQB\TES\WQS\PR\prwqs90.approve.wpd

 PAGE  1


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 104 (Thursday, May 30, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25042-25043]
[FR Doc No: 2019-11266]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0272; FRL-9994-55-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Emission Guidelines for Hospital/Medical/
Infectious Waste Incinerators (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), Emission Guidelines for Hospital/
Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators (EPA ICR Number 1899.09, OMB
Control Number 2060-0422), to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act.
This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved
through May 31, 2019. Public comments were previously requested, via
the Federal Register, on May 30, 2018 during a 60-day comment period.
This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A
fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated
burden and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before July 1, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2011-0272, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other

information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The Emission Guidelines (EG) (40 CFR part 60, subpart Ce)
for Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators were proposed on
February 27, 1995; promulgated on September 15, 1997; and revised on
both October 6, 2009 and April 4, 2011. The Federal Plan Requirements
for these regulations (40 CFR part 62, subpart HHH) were proposed on
July 6, 1999; promulgated on August 15, 2000; and revised on May 13,
2013. Subpart Ce requires either states or tribes to develop plans to
implement the EG. If approvable state or tribal plans were not
developed, the EPA was required to develop a Federal plan (Subpart HHH)
to implement the Emission Guidelines for such states and tribes. The
Federal plan is an interim measure to ensure that emissions standards
are implemented until states assume their role as the preferred
implementers of the EG. The 2013 rule finalized amendments to the HMIWI
federal plan to implement the amended EG adopted on October 6, 2009,
for those states that did not have an approved revised/new state plan
in place within 2 years after promulgation of the EG. The regulations
in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ce and 40 CFR part 62, subpart HHH apply to
each existing individual hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerator
(HMIWI) that either commenced construction prior to December 2, 2008 or
commenced modification prior to April 6, 2010. This information is
being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ce
and 40 CFR part 62, subpart HHH.
    In general, all Emission Guidelines require initial notifications,
performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the
affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and
records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of
all affected facilities subject to the Emission Guidelines.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: The regulations in 40 CFR part 60,
subpart Ce and 40 CFR part 62, subpart HHH apply to each existing
individual hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerator (HMIWI) that
commenced construction prior to December 2, 2008 or commenced
modification prior to April 6, 2010.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart Ce and 40 CFR part 62, subpart HHH).
    Estimated number of respondents: 58 existing respondents,
consisting of 31 privately-owned, 5 Federally-owned, and no State/
locally-owned HMIWI facilities, plus 22 States requiring State Plan
Inventories (total).
    Frequency of response: Semiannually and annually.
    Total estimated burden: 34,600 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $4,620,000 (per year), which includes
$479,000 in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance
costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the total estimated
burden as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved
Burdens. The regulations have not changed over the past three years and
are not anticipated to change over the next three years. There is no
change in the labor hour figures in this ICR compared to the previous
ICR. The number of sources subject to these regulations has remained
constant. There is an increase in the number of responses; however,
this increase is not due to any program changes. We have revised the
number of responses to correctly account for the `report of annual
inspection' for state and federal respondents. The previous ICR only
counted these reports for small rural HWIMIs, but the regulations
require all HWIMIs to submit this report. The burden did not change, as
these costs were already correctly accounted for in Table 1. The labor
costs have increased due to an update in labor rates. This ICR reflects
the on-going burden and costs for the 58 existing respondents.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2019-11266 Filed 5-29-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P