[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 18 (Friday, January 27, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5282-5283]
[FR Doc No: 2023-01605]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1769; Airspace Docket No. 22-AAL-8]
RIN 2120-AA66

Revocation of Colored Federal Airway Blue 38 (B-38) and Blue 40
(B-40); Haines, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to revoke Colored Federal airway Blue 38
(B-38) and Blue 40 (B-40) in the vicinity of Haines, AK due to the
pending decommissioning of the Haines (HNS) Non-directional Beacon
(NDB).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 13, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone:
(800) 647-5527, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2022-1769; Airspace Docket No. 22-AAL-8 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at
www.regulations.gov.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at 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: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Roff, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it would modify the route structure as necessary to
preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National
Airspace System (NAS).

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2022-1769; Airspace Docket No. 22-AAL-8) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
internet at www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to FAA Docket No. FAA-2022-1769; Airspace Docket No. 22-AAL-8.'' The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified comment
closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the comment
closing date. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRM

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at
www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Operations Support Group, Western
Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 2200 South 216th St.,
Des Moines, WA 98198.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19, 2022, and effective
September 15, 2022. FAA Order JO 7400.11G is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11G
lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service
routes, and reporting points.

Background

    The aviation industry has indicated a desire for the FAA to
transition Alaskan en route navigation structures away from NDB
dependency. Advances in technology have allowed for alternate
navigation methods to support decommissioning of high-cost ground
navigation equipment, such as NDBs. The FAA conducted a non-rulemaking
study in accordance with FAA Order JO 7400.2, Procedures for Handling
Airspace Matters, in 2022 on the HNS NDB due to the ongoing high cost
of maintenance and repairs. Interested parties were invited to
participate in this effort by submitting comments on the proposal. The
FAA received no comments or objections to the study, and as a result of
the study, added the HNS NDB to the schedule to be decommissioned.
    Colored Federal airway B-38 extends between the HNS NDB and the
Elephant (EEF) NDB. The decommissioning of the HNS NDB would render B-
38 unusable. This proposal would revoke B-38 in its entirety. The
mitigation to the loss of B-38 is in place with United States Area
Navigation (RNAV) Route T-266 overlying or paralleling the entire
route.
    Colored Federal airway B-40 extends between the HNS NDB and
Robinson Radio Beacon, YT, Canada, excluding the portion within Canada.
The decommissioning of the HNS NDB would render B-40 unusable. This
proposal would revoke B-40 in its entirety. The FAA is establishing
United

States Area Navigation (RNAV) Route T-481 (published as T-383 in Docket
No. FAA-2022-0249 in the Federal Register (87 FR 16681; March 24, 2022)
overlying or paralleling the entire route to mitigate the loss of B-40.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 to revoke
Colored Federal airway B-38 and B-40 in the vicinity of Haines, AK due
to the decommissioning of the HNS NDB. B-38 currently extends between
the HNS NDB and the EEF NDB. B-40 extends between the HNS NDB and
Robinson Radio Beacon, YT, Canada, excluding the portion within Canada.
    Colored Federal airways are published in paragraph 6009(d) of FAA
Order JO 7400.11G dated August 19, 2022 and effective September 15,
2022, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Colored
Federal airways listed in this document would be removed subsequently
in FAA Order JO 7400.11.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule,
when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19,
2022, and effective September 15, 2022, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6009(d) Colored Federal Airways.

* * * * *

B-38 [Remove]

B-40 [Remove]

* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 23, 2023.
Brian Konie,
Acting Manager, Airspace Rules and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2023-01605 Filed 1-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 171 (Thursday, September 3, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53383-53384]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21895]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-1998-4334; FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-2001-9561; FMCSA-
2003-14504; FMCSA-2003-15268; FMCSA-2005-20027; FMCSA-2005-21254;
FMCSA-2007-27897]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
13 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals
from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to
or greater than the level of safety maintained without the exemptions
for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective September 23, 2015. Comments must be
received on or before October 5, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) numbers: Docket No. [Docket No. FMCSA-1998-
4334; FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-2001-9561; FMCSA-2003-14504; FMCSA-2003-
15268; FMCSA-2005-20027; FMCSA-2005-21254; FMCSA-2007-27897], using any
of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles A. Horan, III, Director,
Carrier, Driver and Vehicle Safety Standards,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Department of Transportation, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office
hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

II. Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 13 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 13 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

Linda L. Billings (NV)
Weldon R. Evans (OH)
Orasio Garcia (TX)
Leslie W. Good (OR)
Chester L. Gray (TX)
James P. Guth (PA)
Gregory K. Lilly (WV)
Kenneth A. Reddick (PA)
Leonard Rice, Jr. (GA)
Juan M. Rosas (AZ)
James T. Sullivan (KY)
Larry J. Waldner (SD)
Karl A. Weinert (NY)

    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual has a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each
individual provides a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's
report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical
examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file and retains a copy of the certification on his/her
person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized Federal,
State, or local enforcement official. Each exemption will be valid for
two years unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be
rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower
level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3)
continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals
and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

III. Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 13 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (63 FR 66226; 64 FR

16517; 64 FR 27027; 64 FR 51568; 66 FR 30502; 66 FR 41654; 66 FR 41656;
66 FR 48504; 68 FR 19598; 68 FR 33570; 68 FR 37197; 68 FR 44837; 68 FR
48989; 68 FR 54775; 70 FR 2701; 70 FR 16887; 70 FR 30999; 70 FR 42615;
70 FR 46567; 70 FR 53412; 72 FR 39879; 72 FR 52419; 72 FR 62896; 74 FR
43221; 76 FR 53708; 78 FR 78477). Each of these 13 applicants has
requested renewal of the exemption and has submitted evidence showing
that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the requirement
specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision impairment is
stable. In addition, a review of each record of safety while driving
with the respective vision deficiencies over the past two years
indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision exemption
requirements.
    These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each
driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate commerce.
Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for each
renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a
level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

IV. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate by submitting comments and
related materials.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (FMCSA-1998-4334; FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-2001-9561; FMCSA-2003-
14504; FMCSA-2003-15268; FMCSA-2005-20027; FMCSA-2005-21254; FMCSA-
2007-27897), indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online or by
fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means.
FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an
email address, or a phone number in the body of your document so the
Agency can contact you if it has questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
put the docket number, ``FMCSA-1998-4334; FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-2001-
9561; FMCSA-2003-14504; FMCSA-2003-15268; FMCSA-2005-20027; FMCSA-2005-
21254; FMCSA-2007-27897'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and click ``Search.''
When the new screen appears, click on ``Comment Now!'' button and type
your comment into the text box in the following screen. Choose whether
you are submitting your comment as an individual or on behalf of a
third party and then submit. If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\
by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. FMCSA
will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period and may change this notice based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert the docket number,
``FMCSA-1998-4334; FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-2001-9561; FMCSA-2003-14504;
FMCSA-2003-15268; FMCSA-2005-20027; FMCSA-2005-21254; FMCSA-2007-
27897'' in the ``Keyword'' box and click ``Search.'' Next, click ``Open
Docket Folder'' button choose the document listed to review. If you do
not have access to the Internet, you may view the docket online by
visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

    Issued on: August 24, 2015.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-21895 Filed 9-2-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: December 2, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 230)]
[Notices]
[Page 63148-63149]
[DOCID:fr02de09-34]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2621-009]

Lockhart Power Company; Notice of Application Tendered for Filing
With the Commission and Soliciting Additional Study Requests, and
Establishing Procedural Schedule for Relicensing and a Deadline for
Submission of Final Amendments

November 24, 2009.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: New Major License.
    b. Project No.: 2621-009.
    c. Date Filed: November 16, 2009.
    d. Applicant: Lockhart Power Company.
    e. Name of Project: Pacolet Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The existing project is located on the Pacolet River
in Spartanburg County, South Carolina. The project does not affect
Federal lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Brian D. Stone, Chief Operating Officer,
Lockhart Power Company, P.O. Box 10, 420 River Street, Lockhart, SC
29364; Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Lee Emery,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or via e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Cooperating Agencies: Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests in item l below. Cooperating agencies should note the
Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation of
the environmental document cannot also intervene. See, 94 FERC ] 61,076
(2001).
    k. Pursuant to Section 4.32(b)(7) of 18 CFR of the Commission's
regulations, if any resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person believes
that an additional scientific study should be conducted to form an
adequate factual basis for complete analysis of the application on its
merit, the resource, Indian Tribe, or person must file a request for a
study with the Commission not later than 60 days from the date of
filing of the application, and serve a copy of the request on the
applicant.
    l. Deadline for filing additional study requests and requests for
cooperating agency status: January 15, 2010.
    Additional study requests and requests for cooperating agency
status may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
(http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ferconline.asp) under the ``e-Filing''
link. For a simpler method of submitting text only comments, click on
``Quick Comment.'' For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>call toll-free at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or,
for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly
encourages electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To
paper-file, mail an original and eight copies to: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    m. This application is not ready for environmental analysis at this
time.
    n. Project Description: The proposed Pacolet Hydroelectric Project
would consist of two developments with a total installed capacity of
1,900 kilowatts (kW). The project would produce an estimated 8,100,000
kilowatt-hours annually. The electricity produced by the project would
be sold to Lockhart Power Company's customers.
    The upper development would include the following existing and
proposed facilities: (1) An existing 18-foot high, 315-foot-long
concrete gravity dam with proposed three-foot-high flashboards; (2) an
existing 30-acre reservoir, with a useable storage capacity of 90 acre-
feet; (3) a proposed 36-foot-wide intake that would be equipped with
trashracks having a 1.375-inch clear bar spacing; (4) a proposed 24- by
40-foot concrete powerhouse, containing a vertical Kaplan turbine with
an estimated hydraulic capacity of 550 cubic feet per second (cfs) and
an estimated generating capacity of 1,100 kW; (5) a proposed tailrace;
(6) a proposed 1,000-foot-long, 34.5 kilovolt (kV) transmission line;
(7) a proposed switchyard with storage warehouse; and (8) appurtenant
facilities.
    The lower development includes the following constructed
facilities: (1) A 24-foot-high, 347-foot-long, concrete gravity dam
with 4-foot-high flashboards; (2) an 11-acre impoundment, with a
useable storage capacity of 44 acre-feet; (3) an intake structure,
equipped with trashracks having 1.375-inch clear bar spacing; (4) a 67-
foot-long by 32-foot-wide concrete powerhouse, containing two vertical
turbines with each having a maximum hydraulic capacity of 225 cfs and
being directly connected to a 400-kW generator unit; (5) a tailrace
with training wall; (6) an approximately 450-foot-long bypassed reach;
(7) a 250-foot-long, 34.5-kV transmission line; (8) a switchyard
containing a storage warehouse and three transformers; and (9)
appurtenant facilities.
    Both developments would be operated in a modified run-of-river
mode, where water levels in each reservoir would be maintained within
0.1-inch from the top of the flash boards, except during peak
generation periods when water levels could drop 3 to 4 feet below the
crest of the dam, depending on the development. The

applicant proposes to release a minimum flow from the lower development
that equals leakage from the dam (seasonally ranging from 22 to 49
cfs). Since the tailrace of the upper development discharges directly
into the lower development's reservoir, no minimum flow is proposed for
the upper development.
    o. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in item (h) above.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    p. With this notice, we are initiating consultation with the South
Carolina State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), as required by
Sec.  106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the regulations of
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 36 CFR, at Sec.  800.4.
    q. Procedural Schedule: The application will be processed according
to the following Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule
will be made as appropriate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Milestone                           Target date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue Deficiency Letter..............  December 18, 2009.
Issue Scoping Document...............  December 18, 2009.
Request Additional Information.......  January 22, 2010.
Notice of Acceptance.................  March 26, 2010.
Notice of Application Ready for        March 26, 2010.
 Environmental Analysis.
Filing of recommendations,             May 25, 2010.
 preliminary terms and conditions,
 and fishway prescriptions.
Commission issues Non-Draft EA or EIS  September 22, 2010.
Comments on EA or EIS................  October 22, 2010.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice
of ready for environmental analysis.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-28794 Filed 12-1-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1

Supporting Statement

for

Information Collection Request

Information Requirements for Importation of Nonconforming Vehicles
(Renewal)

EPA ICR 0010.11

December 2006

Compliance and Innovative Strategies Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

Office of Air and Radiation

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

PART A OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

1.    IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

(a)  TITLE OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

    Information Requirements for Importation of Nonconforming Vehicles,
OMB Control Number 2060-0095, ICR 0010.11.

(b)  SHORT CHARACTERIZATION (ABSTRACT)

     The Clean Air Act requires motor vehicles and engines imported into
the U.S. to conform to applicable emission requirements.  This
Information Collection Request covers importation reporting requirements
for light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, and on-road motorcycle
vehicles and engines. The information collection instruments are Form
3520-1 (“Form 1) for initial entry, and Form 3520-8 (“Form 8”) for
final entry (see below). All heavy-duty on-road and all non-road vehicle
and engine importation reporting requirements are now covered by EPA ICR
Series 1723 (OMB 2060-0320). The two programs use separate forms, have
differing regulatory provisions, and are processed by differing staffs.
Most importers are also required to apply for and obtain a certificate
of conformity from EPA; that information burden for the light-duty and
motorcycle certification program is covered by EPA ICR Series 0783 (OMB
2060-0104).  There is some overlap between the present ICR and 0783
because testing for Independent Commercial Importers (ICIs) is reported
both on Form 8, covered by this ICR, and, initially, and in more detail,
for certification via ICR 0783. (Similarly, all importing light-duty
vehicle and motorcycle manufacturers, and not just ICIs, use Form 1.)
Thus, the certification information burden is covered in ICR 0783 and
the (different and less detailed) testing burden for imports subsequent
to certification in this ICR.

     Rather than attempting to allocate the fees for light-duty vehicle
and motorcycle imports between initial certification fees and additional
fees upon importation of additional vehicles under a certificate (most
ICIs pay reduced fees and therefore pay additional 1% fees upon each
additional import) the entire import fees burden is included under ICR
0783. The burden of submitting the fee and associated forms is covered
by EPA ICR Series 2080 (OMB 2060-0545).

     The post-certification, final-entry testing burden for light-duty
vehicle imports falls into two categories. For regular light-duty ICIs,
a city test (the “FTP”) is required for every third vehicle imported
under a certificate for the first 300 vehicles imported, and every fifth
thereafter (40 CFR 85.1505). The other light-duty imports category is
“mod and test”, which applies to vehicles whose original production
year is six or more prior to the year of importation. Each such vehicle
must be modified to meet applicable emissions requirements and tested
with the FTP (40 CFR 85.1509). In the first case, each FTP test will be
accompanied by a 2-hour evaporative emissions test, in the second case
by an OBD (on-board diagnostics) demonstration, and in both cases by a
highway test in order to compute a combined fuel economy number to
comply with gas guzzler fuel economy requirements. Form 8 includes
spaces for reporting the test results and combined fuel economy for
those vehicles that undergo them. For motorcycle imports, no additional
testing is required beyond the original certification testing. Only four
nonconforming motorcycles have been imported in the last two years.

     Most ICIs contract with a broker to do some of the imports process
and a testing laboratory to perform the necessary tests. The testing lab
also performs whatever modifications are necessary to bring the vehicle
up to certification standards.

     The Compliance and Innovative Strategies Division  (CISD) in
EPA’s Office of Transportation and Air Quality collects information
and requires some recordkeeping to help insure that imported vehicles
and engines are brought into compliance with federal emission
requirements or that they qualify for exemption or exclusion from them.
“Nonconforming” refers to the vehicles and engines that are not
constructed to EPA certification standards and therefore must meet
various additional requirements, such as testing, prior to being
certified and available for sale in the U.S.  The information is also
used by the U.S. Customs Service (Customs), state regulatory agencies,
businesses, and individuals to verify whether or not vehicles are in
compliance.

    Information collected includes vehicle identification data, U.S.
Customs entry statements that such information is correct, and summary
emission test results.  The information is either stored in a computer
database, or retained in document form.  The information is used to
monitor compliance of imports and respond to inquiries from the public
concerning the compliance status of specific imported vehicles. This
information is collected on two forms (attached):

EPA Form 3520-1.  This form is used by importers who are applying for
entry into the U.S. of light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, and
motorcycle vehicles or engines, whether conforming, nonconforming,
exempt, or excluded.  The form identifies to all parties involved the
category of import and the requirements that are appropriate to that
category. The form goes from the importer or its agent (broker) to
Customs, which stamps the form and forwards it in batch to EPA. EPA
gathers the forms in Ann Arbor where they are logged and filed for
future reference.

EPA Form 3520-8. This form is used by ICIs to request “final
admission” of a nonconforming vehicle or engine upon their
certification that it has been brought into compliance with Federal
emission requirements. The form is held for fifteen days, during which
the ICI can not release the vehicle for sale or to its owner. This gives
EPA a chance to conduct any review or oversight, including confirmation
testing, deemed necessary before the vehicle or engine is released.

     The information collection will involve an estimated yearly 12,352
responses from 12,005 respondents at an O&M cost of $1,780, a capital
cost of  $104,790, and a labor cost of $431,765.

2.   NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

(a)  NEED/AUTHORITY FOR THE COLLECTION

     Joint EPA and Customs regulations at 40 CFR 85.1501 et seq., 19 CFR
12.73,  and 19 CFR 12.74, promulgated under the authority under the
Clean Air Act (Sections 203 and 208), give authority for the collection
of the information.  The collection helps insure compliance of imported
vehicles and engines with federal emissions requirements, which helps
meet the Agency goal of reducing air pollution.  Without this
information, EPA could not confirm that imported vehicles and engines
conform to U.S. emission requirements, and consequently would not be
able to allow importation or sale of these vehicles and engines.

(b)  PRACTICAL UTILITY/USERS OF THE DATA

     CISD receives the forms, and the information on them is used by
Agency  personnel to verify that all Federal emission requirements (or
exemptions or exclusions thereto) concerning imported nonconforming
light-duty motor vehicles and motorcycles are met.  The information is
also used to identify and prosecute violators of the regulations and to
monitor the program in achieving the objectives of the regulations. It
is also used to answer public inquiries concerning the compliance or
exempted or excluded status of particular motor vehicles. Public access
to this information is not direct but rather through the Automotive
Imports Helpline in order to maintain security of information protected
under the Privacy Act.

3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

(a)  NONDUPLICATION

     A search of the Government Information Locator System (GILS) found
no other program or agency collecting this information. As explained
above, Form 1 is necessary to identify, at the point of importation, the
applicable category of the vehicle or engine for regulatory purposes,
and to receive Customs acknowledgement thereof; Form 8 is necessary to
report test results to EPA (where required) and alert it of pending
release to the owner. As stated on Form 1, vehicles that are primarily
manufactured for use on public roads are also required to file an HS-7
Declaration Form to identify the basis for the vehicle’s admission
under the laws administered by the Department of Transportation. EPA had
discussions with the Department in late 2005 that considered whether a
combined form would be feasible, and the conclusion was that a single
form was not practical at this time because of the unique requirements
of each program and the different agencies administering them.

(b)  PUBLIC NOTICE

     A Federal Register notice has been published, soliciting public
comment for this ICR on September 14, 2006 (71 FR 54280); no comments
were received.

(c)  CONSULTATIONS

     Consultations have been made with ICIs to discuss form revisions,
to update burden and cost estimates, and to receive suggestions about
the operation of the program.  The following ICIs were contacted:

Auto Enterprises, Inc.

850 N. Rochester Rd.

Clawson, MI  48017

Rep: Mr.  Philip Trupiano

Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

J.K. Technologies , L.L.C.

3500 Sweet Air Street

Baltimore, MD  21211

Rep: Mr. Jonathan Weisheit

Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Compliance and Research Services, Inc.

1701 Front Street

Plainfield, NJ  07063-1066

Rep: Bob DePalma

Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>

(d)  EFFECTS OF LESS FREQUENT COLLECTION

                 Since reporting is done only at the time of initial and
“final” entry, the effects of less frequent collection would be to
seriously undermine the Agency's ability to determine whether vehicles
being imported meet applicable emission requirements. Consequently, the
Agency would not be able to allow entry of vehicles being imported.
Therefore, less frequent collection is not feasible.

(e)  GENERAL GUIDELINES

     This ICR requires that ICIs notify EPA when requesting final
admission for vehicles (Form 8) and this may occasionally result in
reporting more often than quarterly if vehicles are tested and ready for
sale more frequently than quarterly.  This requirement is necessary for
EPA to inspect vehicles prior to release from the ICI.  If EPA only
required quarterly reports, either the ICI would have to hold vehicles
and release them on a quarterly basis or EPA would not likely have the
opportunity to inspect or require confirmatory testing of vehicles
imported by the ICI.

     EPA's regulations require that ICIs retain records for a period of
six years from the date of entry (40 CFR 85.1507(a)).  ICIs are
responsible for the same emissions warranties that apply to original
manufacturers, generally extending to 8 years or 80,000 miles for major
emission control components.  The Clean Air Act requires that light-duty
vehicles meet federal emission standards throughout their useful lives,
which is defined by the Clean Air Act to be 10 years or 100,000 miles
(Sec. 202(d)); these requirements are implemented through the
certification process for ICIs just as they are for original
manufacturers. The imports regulations specify that the useful life
period starts from the date that the vehicle is released to the owner by
the ICI.  The six year record retention requirement is the  minimum
considered consistent with these obligations.

(f)  CONFIDENTIALITY

      Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of
confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to policies set
forth in Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 2, Subpart B - Confidentiality of
Business Information (see CFR 2).  The public is not permitted access to
information containing personal or organizational identifiers.  This
collection complies with the Privacy Act of 1974 and OMB Circular A-130.

(g) SENSITIVE QUESTIONS

 	There are no sensitive questions.

4.  THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

(a)  RESPONDENTS/NAICS CODES

      The Light-duty Vehicle Group of CISD collects information from
individual importers and both small and large companies that import
light-duty vehicle, light-duty truck, and on-road motorcycle vehicles or
engines.  The NAICS code for respondents is 423110, Automobile and Other
Motor Vehicle Merchant Wholesalers, and 441200, Other Motor Vehicle
Dealers.

(b)  INFORMATION REQUESTED

(i)  Data Items

     The data requested in reports include:

     - vehicle identification number

     - vehicle make

     - vehicle model

     - model year of the vehicle

     - port of entry

     - date of entry

     - entry number

     - importer name, address and telephone number

     - owner name, address, telephone number and SSN or EIN

     - emission test results

     - applicable EPA certificate of conformity

     - fuel economy

     - test date

     - modification date

     - name of emissions test laboratory

     - vehicle storage location

     - justification for an exclusion or exemption, if applicable

     and records are maintained on:

     - documents related to certification, modification, importation,
storage, registration or                     emission testing

     - bills of sale, invoices, or purchase agreements

     - documents providing parts identification data associated with the
emission control system

     - documents providing evidence of the initiation of the "hold
period"

(ii) Respondent Activities

     To complete the collection, the respondent would:

      -read form instructions

      -collect data and complete forms

      -conduct required emission testing (ICIs only)

INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS FOR

IMPORTATION OF NONCONFORMING MOTOR VEHICLES

AND MOTOR VEHICLE ENGINES

40 CFR PART 85 SUBPARTS P and R

INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS      				CITATION

I. ICI requirements

- Reporting

- Application for final admission   					85.1505(a)

   (certified)

- Reasonable assistance during inspection, 				85.1506(c),(g)(4)

   including copies of records or documents 				85.1506(b)(2)

- Application for final admission   					85.1509(b)

   (modification/test)

- Repair and retest							85.1509(g)

- Maintenance instructions, attestation,  				85.1510(a)

   parts list

- Altitude compensator instructions, attestation 			85.1510(b)

- Emission warranties, attestation   					85.1510(c)

- Emission labeling, attestation   					85.1510(d)

- Fuel economy labeling, attestation  					85.1510(e)

- Gas guzzler tax forms, attestation  					85.1510(f)

- Reply to notice of suspension or  					85.1513(f)(3)(ii),

   revocation      							85.1513(f)(3)(iv)

   									85.1513(f)(6)

- Request for hearing    						85.1513(f)(3)(iii)

Recordkeeping

- Certification, modification, test, purchase, 				85.1507

   sale, storage, registration, importation

- Owners or ultimate purchasers  					85.1508(b)

- Maintenance instructions, parts list,  				85.1510

   altitude compensator instructions,

   emission warranties, emission labeling,

   fuel economy labeling

II. Requirements applying to all importers

- Notification of conditional admission  				85.1504(a)

- Request for prior approval (exemption), 				85.1511(b),(g)

   request for extension of exemption

- Request for prior approval (exclusion)				85.1511(c)-(g)

- Attestations, copy of paid invoice  					85.1512(f)

- Claim of confidentiality    						85.1514

5.  THE INFORMATION COLLECTED--AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

(a)  AGENCY ACTIVITIES

     CISD receives the forms in paper form either directly from the
importers (Form 8) or indirectly from the importers through Customs
(Form 1).  Form 1 data is entered into the Automated Imports Tracking
System (AITS); Form 8 data is collected by the imports team and copies
distributed to certification staff; since late 2005 the data from Form 8
has also been entered into the AITS.  After receiving the information,
EPA uses it to determine whether vehicles meet EPA requirements and
whether to conduct investigations or require confirmatory testing, and
retains it in order to respond to public, State government, and Federal
government inquires.  In addition, ICIs will be included in the Verify
information system, which eventually will include EPA certification
application data for all regulated categories of vehicles and engines;
the first ICI certification applications are currently scheduled for
inclusion in the version of Verify scheduled for initial release in
August, 2007. As part of its effort to provide electronic versions of
all current paper forms, the Verify system will also include Form 8
submissions upon completion of the ICI module.  Any reductions in burden
resulting from this change will be reflected in the next renewal of this
ICR.

(b)  COLLECTION METHODOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT

    Both Customs and CISD use the information to determine if vehicles
meet EPA requirements.  CISD retains information in the AITS and
document form in order to respond to public, State government, and
Federal government inquires, which are handled by CISD staff.

(c)  SMALL ENTITY FLEXIBILITY

     Small entities that are required to submit information to EPA have
been doing so by completing and submitting EPA paper forms.  EPA
regulations provide, as an alternative, for submission of imports data
electronically (e.g. 40 CFR 85.1505(a), 85.1509(b) & (c)). Under EPA
guidance (CCD-02-04;   HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/otaq/cert/dearmfr/dearmfr.htm"
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/cert/dearmfr/dearmfr.htm  ) ICIs qualify per se
as small volume manufacturers entitled to the special provisions
available to all certifying small manufacturers under EPA’s
certification regulations.

(d) COLLECTION SCHEDULE

      The information is not subject to a collection schedule, but is
collected at the time of vehicle entry and when the vehicle is ready for
final admission by EPA.

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

(a) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT BURDEN (HOURS)

Motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines, and on-road motorcycles and
engines

	Hours per Activity	Number Activities	Total Hours

I. Reporting

Form 3520-1	0.5	12,000	6,000

Form 3520-8	0.5	     352	176

Total Responses = 12,352

	II. Recordkeeping

Form 3520-8	0.5	352	176

III. Testing

Form 3520-8

	     Regular ICI	28.0	96	2,688

     Mod and Test	28.0	42	1,176

Total

12,856	10,216

(b) ESTIMATING RESPONDENT COST

	Labor	O&M	Capital/Startup (unamortized)

I. Reporting

Form 3520-1	$201,420	$0	0

Form 3520-8	$8,749 	$1056      	     0

II. Recordkeeping

Form 3520-8	$5,908 	$704 	0

III. Testing

Form 3520-8

	     Regular ICI	$150,044 	$0	$512,000

     Mod and Test	$65,644 	$0	$224,000

Total	$431,765	$1,780	$736,000

(i) Labor Costs

     Labor costs are considered to be more closely approximated by the
motor vehicle manufacturing industry, NAICS 336100, than retail and
wholesale trades in vehicles that do not involve testing and
modification.   Rates for engineering managers, mechanical engineers,
and secretaries (except legal, medical, and executive) are from the May
2005 BLS National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates (  HYPERLINK
"http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_336100.htm"
http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_336100.htm  , accessed August 22,
2006). With a 160% overhead multiplier, these are $81,38, $49.71, and
$33.57, respectively. Most ICI certification representatives who fill
out Form 8s are motor vehicle technicians; Form 1 labor burdens are
considered secretarial. Test labor costs are $55.82 per hour based on
ICR 0783.47.

(ii) Capital/Start-up Costs

     Consistent with ICR 0783, a capital cost of $4,000,000 for a test
facility capable of conducting 750 FTP and highway tests per year has
been allocated on a per-test basis. For ICIs, these test facility costs
will in most cases be covered by contractual costs between the importer
and a testing laboratory. As mentioned above, these costs listed here
are not initial certification costs but the post-certification test
costs for additional imported vehicles. As with other ICRs, these
capital costs are annualized and subject to 7% interest depreciation but
are considered to be on-going rather than startup capital costs in the
sense that as facilities are depreciated they are continually being
replaced.

(iii) Operations and Maintenance Costs

     Operations and maintenance costs were calculated based on responses
received from the ICIs contacted.  The Operations and Maintenance cost
for reporting ordinarily involves a purchase of services from brokers
who complete a package of importation forms (including those of other
agencies) and file them with Customs and EPA.  This cost is estimated as
a component of overall broker activities to import a vehicle or engine,
and incorporates a $2 per form recordkeeping cost for broker form
retention within overall broker activities, a $3 per form mailing cost
for Form 8s, and a total of $1 per form for Form 1.  O&M costs
associated with testing are negligible compared with those for
certification vehicles; post-certification vehicles do not have mileage
accumulation or durability demonstration requirements or consequent
vehicle depreciation; vehicle preparation is minimal.  Costs associated
with modification of vehicles necessary to bring them up to
certification standards are excluded: they are not reported on the
imports forms, they vary widely depending on the vehicle being imported,
and they therefore can not be predicted or accounted from one year to
another; finally, they are analogous to, for example, the costs of
catalytic converters and other emissions control technologies that
original manufacturers are required to install in vehicles in order to
comply with the Clean Air Act, and which are not included in the
certification paperwork burden.

(c) ESTIMATING AGENCY BURDEN AND COST

     The imports program is administered by EPA's Compliance and
Innovative Strategies Division (CISD). Forty percent of one Full Time
Equivalent employee (FTE), GS 12/3;  twenty percent of one Senior
Environmental Employment (SEE) Program employee (the SEE Program is an
employment program for older workers authorized by the Environmental
Programs assistance Act, passed by Congress in l984, and provides
employment opportunities to senior citizens age 55 and over); and a
portion of the work assignment under a government contract  are
allocated to imports activities.  Based on the 2006 GS pay schedule, EPA
estimates an hourly $34.35 for the FTE, then multiplies the hourly rates
by the standard government benefits multiplication factor of 1.6, at a
cost of $45,728, and a cost of  $8,480 for the SEE;  $179,450 is
estimated for the contractor.  The contractor estimate is based upon the
work assignment rather than an estimate of hours. An estimated total
agency cost of $233,657 per year is therefore allocated to imports
activities.  These activities include both on-road imports (this ICR)
and nonroad imports (ICR 1723; OMB 2060-0320). An estimated 90% of these
activities currently involve on-road imports; consequently, $210,292 is
the estimate for the agency cost for purposes of this ICR.

(d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

	We estimate 12,000 Form 1s are submitted, based on an extrapolation of
entries in the AITS (not all have yet been entered), averaging one
respondent per form, and 352 Form 8s from five ICIs, based on a hand
count of Form 8s received in 2005 and 2006, plus an estimate based on
actual and projected imports from one high-volume importer covering four
original production years. The total number of responses is therefore
estimated as 12,352. The estimated number of respondents is 12,005. For
each engine family, one imported vehicle is used for certification
testing; therefore, while the forms count does not decrease, the testing
responses is decreased by the number of import engine families. For
model year 2005, 21 ICI engine families were certified; the count of 300
regular ICIs was reduced by 11 to total 289 vehicles subject to
post-certification testing; every third vehicle results in an estimate
of  96 tests; the total of 52 mod & test vehicles was reduced by 10
certification vehicles; the remaining 42 are subject to tests.

(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost

(i) Respondent Tally

Respondents					                12,005

Responses						    12,352

Burden Hours						    10,216

Labor Cost						$431,765

Operating Cost					    $1,780

Capital Cost						$736,000

Capital Cost (Annualized)				$104,790

Total (Annualized)					$538,335

(ii) Agency Tally

Employees						             2

Employee Labor Cost					  $48,787

Contract Labor Cost					$161,505

Total Cost						$210,292

6(f) Reasons For Change In Burden

     This ICR follows the burden hours assumptions of the previous
renewal for filling out the forms themselves, but has a substantial
change in other and overall hours and burdens due to the following:
First, the labor burden of recordkeeping has been adjusted.  These
replace an O&M cost per form in the prior estimate. Second, the number
of Form 8s has been increased from 200 to 352. The number of Form 1s has
been reduced from 20,000 to 12,000 based on a better estimate due to the
availability of a logged database. (The prior renewal listed 13,000
respondents filing 11,200 responses.) Third, the testing cost is
modified to distinguish the different testing requirements for the two
different classes of ICIs.  Fourth, an O&M and a capital cost are
assigned to the testing requirement, consistent with other certification
ICRs, namely the 0783 series. Fifth, this testing O&M cost replaces a
$660,000 O&M expense that was in the prior renewal. That cost was
unelaborated but probably included an estimate of modification costs,
which are excluded here for the reasons stated above.

6(e) BURDEN STATEMENT

     Public reporting burden for this collection is estimated to average
49 minutes per response.  Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency.  This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.  An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.  The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

     To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy
of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection
techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under
Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0740, which is available for online
viewing at   HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov
, or in person viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information
Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.  The EPA Docket Center Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays.  The telephone number for the Reading Room is
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation
Docket and Information Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  An electronic version
of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov.  This site can
be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of
the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the
public docket that are available electronically.  When in the system,
select “search,” then key in the Docket ID Number identified above.
Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW,
Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.  Please include
the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0740 and OMB Control Number
2060-0095 in any correspondence.

 PAGE

 PAGE   13


Date: September 5, 2002 From: Brenda Shine, North State Engineering, Inc.

To: David Randall RTI Project Leader Miscellaneous Organic Chemicals MACT Standard Subject: Meeting Minutes Teleconference with Kodak Corporation June 13, 2002 I. Introduction On June 13, 2002, representatives of Kodak held a teleconference with Randy McDonald and Brenda Shine to discuss provisions in the proposed Miscellaneous Organic Chemicals NESHAP. The attached Powerpoint presentation was forwarded by Kodak prior to the teleconference as background. The following issues were discussed: 1) the intent of the family of materials definition and preamble discussion, 2) the definition of process vent and how it should be applied to sources such as equipment exhaust capture systems ( elephant trunk systems), 3) the format of the proposed process vent requirements, and 4) the proposed pollution prevention alternative.

The paragraphs below summarize the discussion.

II. Participants Kodak Deb Chapin Bill Lorry Walter Toot USEPA Randy McDonald NSE Brenda Shine 2 III. Discussion A. Family of Materials Kodak is concerned about the MON's definition and discussion relating to family of materials. Their facility manufactures proprietary imaging chemicals, but these chemicals serve various functions, as presented in the attached presentation. Kodak manufactures on the order of 1,000 chemicals at their site; all these products are considered imaging chemicals but Kodak did not have a clear idea of how the definition of family of materials in the proposed MON would require that products be grouped into families of materials. Products grouped according to end use include photographic couplers, dies, stabilizers, emulsions, polymers for toners, suspension polymers, and other miscellaneous products. Among these products, there are different classes of couplers, for example, and different chemicals based on chemical structure and end use characteristics. Kodak representatives stressed that the definition needed to be clear.

B. Definition of Process Vent and Format of Process Vent Standards Kodak briefly described elephant trunk systems that are used to reduce operator exposure during periods in which a manway or hatch in a process vessel must be open or closed. They want EPA to consider some language that would clearly describe requirements for these systems and suggested that the rule differentiate between personal hygiene or personal safety and process requirements. They also suggested a maximum limit for an emissions episode below which an emission event could be considered deminimis. Kodak representatives indicated that they would like EPA to consider another format to accommodate insignificant emissions.

C. Pollution Prevention Alternative Without going into details, Kodak representatives indicated that they would like to see the pollution prevention alternative be extended to beyond a single process basis. Their written comments will contain details of how this alternative could be implemented. Attachment Family of Materials Compliance Strategy Issues


[Federal Register: November 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 230)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 72314-72316]
[DOCID:fr28no08-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-1020 Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-053-AD;
Amendment 39-15751; AD 2008-24-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Vulcanair S.p.A. Model P68 Series
Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an
aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    The Safe Fatigue Limits (SFL) of the Wing Structure in the P68
Series aircraft have been redefined from the current 8,500 Flight
Hours to a new value to be calculated up to a maximum of 17,500
Flight Hours. This has been developed by Vulcanair under Change No.
MOD.P68/79 Rev. 1 and approved by EASA with No. EASA.A.C.02482 on 07
June 2006.

    We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective January 2, 2009.
    On January 2, 2009, the Director of the Federal Register approved
the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this
AD.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or in person at Document 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: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace
Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas
City, Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on September 26, 2008
(73 FR 55786). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for
the specified products. The MCAI states:

    The Safe Fatigue Limits (SFL) of the Wing Structure in the P68
Series aircraft have been redefined from the current 8,500 Flight
Hours to a new value to be calculated up to a maximum of 17,500
Flight Hours. This has been developed by Vulcanair under Change No.
MOD.P68/79 Rev. 1 and approved by EASA with No. EASA.A.C.02482 on 07
June 2006.
    The new Safe Fatigue Limits depend on:
    (a) Status of the modification (reinforcement) of the wing
structure itself (Partenavia Service Bulletin No. 65 refers); and
    (b) Aircraft Flight Hours accumulated before the modification
(reinforcement) was implemented.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have required different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a Note within the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this AD will
affect 72 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it will take
about 80 work-hours per product to comply with basic requirements of
this AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S.
operators to be $460,800, or $6,400 per product.
    We have no way of determining the number of products that may need
any necessary follow-on actions.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this 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 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); and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD Docket.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 AD:

2008-24-11 Vulcanair S.p.A.: Amendment 39-15751; Docket No. FAA-
2008-1020; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-053-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective January
2, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Models P 68, P 68B, P 68C, P 68C-TC, P 68
``OBSERVER,'' AP68TP300 ``SPARTACUS,'' P68TC ``OBSERVER,'' AP68TP
600 ``VIATOR,'' and P68 ``OBSERVER 2'' airplanes; all serial
numbers, certificated in any category.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 51: Standard
Practices/Structures.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    The Safe Fatigue Limits (SFL) of the Wing Structure in the P68
Series aircraft have been redefined from the current 8,500 Flight
Hours to a new value to be calculated up to a maximum of 17,500
Flight Hours. This has been developed by Vulcanair under Change No.
MOD.P68/79 Rev. 1 and approved by EASA with No. EASA.A.C.02482 on 07
June 2006.
    The new Safe Fatigue Limits depend on:
    (a) Status of the modification (reinforcement) of the wing
structure itself (Partenavia Service Bulletin No. 65 refers); and
    (b) Aircraft Flight Hours accumulated before the modification
(reinforcement) was implemented.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions:
    (1) For serial numbers 01 through 356, determine the safe
fatigue limit of the wing structure following Vulcanair S.p.A.
Service Bulletin No. 120 Rev. 1, dated June 7, 2006, within 8,500
hours time-in-service (TIS) since new or within 500 hours TIS after
January 2, 2009 (the effective date of this AD), whichever occurs
later.
    (2) For serial numbers 01 through 356, inspect the wing
structure and the wing to fuselage attachments following Vulcanair
S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 120 Rev. 1, dated June 7, 2006, within
the safe fatigue limit determined in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD or
within 500 hours TIS after January 2, 2009 (the effective date of
this AD), whichever occurs later. Repetitively thereafter inspect at
intervals not to exceed every 500 hours TIS.
    (3) For serial numbers 357 and above, inspect the wing structure
and the wing to fuselage attachments following Vulcanair S.p.A.
Service Bulletin No. 120 Rev. 1, dated June 7, 2006, within 17,500
hours TIS since new or within 500 hours TIS after January 2, 2009
(the effective date of this AD), whichever occurs later.
Repetitively thereafter inspect at intervals not to exceed every 500
hours TIS.
    (4) For all serial numbers, inspect the stabilator following
Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 120 Rev. 1, dated June 7,
2006, within 8,500 hours TIS since new or within 500 hours TIS after
January 2, 2009 (the effective date of this AD), whichever occurs
later. Repetitively thereafter inspect at intervals not to exceed
every 500 hours TIS.
    (5) If as a result of any inspection required by paragraphs
(f)(2), (f)(3), or (f)(4) of this AD you find any discrepancies (for
example, cracked or broken parts), do one of the following actions
before further flight:
    (i) Repair the airplane following FAA-approved repair
instructions obtained from Vulcanair S.p.A.; or
    (ii) Repair the airplane following a repair method approved by
the FAA for this AD. Contact the FAA at the address in paragraph
(g)(1) of this AD for an FAA-approved method.

    Note 1: For certain Model P 68 airplanes, AD 85-08-04 requires
repetitive inspections of the front and rear wing spars for cracks
with modification if cracks are found. The modification terminates
the repetitive inspections required in AD 85-08-04 and may be done
regardless if cracks are found. The actions of AD 85-08-08 are
independent of this AD action and remain in effect.

FAA AD Differences

    Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows:
    (1) The MCAI is extending the safe fatigue limits of the wing
structure and the wing to fuselage attachments of certain airplanes.
Airplanes registered in the United States did not have safe fatigue
limits established for the wing structure and the wing to fuselage
attachments. This AD is establishing safe fatigue limits for the
wing structure and the wing to fuselage attachments. This AD is also
establishing safe fatigue limits for the stabilator.
    (2) The MCAI requires implementation of safe fatigue limits into
the airplane maintenance program (maintenance program). An airplane
registered in the United States and operated under 14 CFR part 91 is
required to have a maintenance program, but not necessarily
following the airplane maintenance manual. This AD requires you to
do specific actions of Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 120
Rev. 1, dated June 7, 2006, rather than incorporating those actions
into the maintenance program.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency AD No.: 2007-
0027, dated February 5, 2007, for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use Vulcanair S.p.A. Service Bulletin No. 120 Rev.
1, dated June 7, 2006, to do the actions required by this AD, unless
the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Vulcanair S.p.A, Via G. Pascoli, 7, Casoria (Naples), 80026 Italy;
telephone: +39<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: +39<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: http://www.vulcanair.com.
    (3) You may review copies at the FAA, Central Region, Office of
the Regional Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; or 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 Kansas City, Missouri, on November 19, 2008.
John R. Colomy,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-27916 Filed 11-26-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P