[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 58 (Friday, March 25, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 16766]
[FR Doc No: 2011-7044]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13840-000]

ECOsponsible, Inc.; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions to Intervene, and
Competing Applications

    On September 15, 2010, ECOsponsible, Inc., filed an application for
a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act
(FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the Niagara River
Community Hydro Project 2 (Niagara 2 Project or
project) to be located on the Niagara River, near Lewiston, in Niagara
County, New York. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued,
is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license application
during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the
permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise
enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the owners' express
permission.
    The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) Five
hydrokinetic turbine support structures, each containing four 10-foot-
diameter Spitfire Horizontal Axis Turbines rated at approximately 250
kilowatts (kW) each; (2) a 150-kilovolt (kV) underwater transmission
line connecting the triads and transmitting electricity to an onshore
collection substation and point of interconnection switchyard; (3) an
operations and maintenance building to house the command center of the
project's supervisory control and data acquisition system; and (4)
appurtenant facilities. The estimated annual generation of the Niagara
2 Project would be 550,000 megawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Dennis Ryan, ECOsponsible, Inc., 120 Mitchell
Road, East Aurora, NY 14052-9710, phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Allyson Conner<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.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. 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 http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>call toll-free at (866) 208-
3676; 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 seven copies to: Kimberly D.
Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-13840-000) in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: March 18, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-7044 Filed 3-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 18, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 242)]
[Notices]
[Page 71677-71678]
[DOCID:fr18de07-47]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP08-14-000]

El Paso Natural Gas Pipeline Company; Notice of Intent To Prepare
an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Hobbs Expansion Project
and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

December 11, 2007.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the Hobbs Expansion Project
involving construction and operation of natural gas pipeline facilities
by El Paso Natural Gas Pipeline Company (El Paso) in Lea County, New
Mexico and Winkler County, Texas. The EA will be used by the Commission
in its decision-making process to determine whether the project is in
the public convenience and necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the
Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested
agencies on the project. Your input will help determine which issues
need to be evaluated in the EA. Please note that the scoping period
will close on January 11, 2008. Details on how to submit comments are
provided in the Public Participation section of this notice.
    This notice is being sent to affected landowners; federal, state,
and local government agencies; elected officials; Native American
tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers.
State and local government representatives are asked to notify their
constituents of this proposed project and to encourage them to comment
on their areas of concern.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?'' addresses a number
of typically asked questions, including the use of eminent domain and
how to participate in the Commission's proceedings. It is available for
viewing on the FERC Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov).

Summary of the Proposed Project

    El Paso proposes three components (compression, new pipeline, and
piping modifications) to meet the natural gas delivery requirements at
the SPS Hobbs Power Plant in Lea County, New Mexico. El Paso proposes
to construct, own, and operate:
     A natural gas-fired, reciprocating jumper compressor unit
totalling 3,550 horsepower (HP), with appurtenances, at it Eunice ``C''
Compressor Station;
     7.3 miles of 20-inch-diameter pipeline and the new Hobbs
Delivery Meter Station;
     Pipeline system improvements to include the Maximum
Allowable Operation Pressure (MAOP) up-rate of 5.7 miles of the
existing 16-inch-diameter Line No. 30131; and
     Plant yard pipe modifications at El Paso's existing
Keystone and Eunice ``B'' Compressor Stations.
    All work would occur in Lea County, New Mexico except for the work
at the Keystone Compressor Station in Winkler County, Texas. El Paso
also proposes to abandon in place 1,700 feet of existing Line No. 30131
pipeline in Lea County, New Mexico.
    The general location of the proposed facilities is shown in
Appendix 1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The appendices referenced in this notice are not being
printed in the Federal Register. Copies of all appendices are
available on the Commission's website at the ``eLibrary'' link or
from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, or call<PHONE_NUMBER>. For instructions on
connecting to eLibrary refer to the ``Additional Information''
section of this notice. Copies of the appendices were sent to all
those receiving this notice in the mail. Requests for detailed maps
of the proposed facilities should be made directly to El Paso.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The EA Process

    We \2\ are preparing this EA to comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) which requires the Commission to take
into account the environmental impact that could result if it
authorizes El Paso's proposal. By this notice, we are also asking
federal, state, and local agencies with jurisdiction and/or special
expertise with respect to environmental issues to formally cooperate
with us in the preparation of the EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``We,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the FERC's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With this notice, we are asking federal, state, and local agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues to formally cooperate with us in the preparation
of the EA. These agencies may choose to participate once they have
evaluated the proposal relative to their responsibilities. Additional
agencies that would like to request cooperating agency status should
follow the instructions for filing comments provided under the Public
Participation section of this notice.
    NEPA also requires the FERC to discover and address concerns the
public may have about proposals. This process is referred to as
``scoping.'' The main goal of the scoping process is to focus the
analysis in the EA on the important environmental issues. By this
Notice of Intent, we are requesting public comments on the scope of the
issues to address in the EA. All comments received are considered
during the preparation of the EA.
    The EA will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the
construction and operation of the proposed project under these general
headings:
     Geology and soils.
     Land use.
     Water resources, fisheries, and wetlands.
     Cultural resources.
     Vegetation and wildlife.
     Air quality and noise.
     Endangered and threatened species.
    We will also evaluate possible alternatives to the proposed project
or portions of the project, where necessary, and make recommendations
on how to lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    Our independent analysis of the issues will be in the EA. Depending
on the comments received during the scoping process, the EA may be
published and mailed to federal, state, and local agencies, public
interest groups, interested individuals, affected landowners,
newspapers, libraries, and the Commission's official service list for
this proceeding. A comment period will be allotted for review if the EA
is published. We will consider all comments on the EA before we make
our recommendations to the Commission.
    To ensure your comments are considered, please carefully follow the
instructions in the Public Participation section below.

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the project. By becoming a commentor, your
concerns will be addressed in the EA and considered by the Commission.
You should focus on the potential environmental effects of the
proposal, alternatives to the proposal including alternative compressor
station sites, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impact.
The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. Please
carefully follow these instructions to ensure that your comments are
received in time and properly recorded:
     Send an original and two copies of your letter to:
Kimberley D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 888 First St., NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426;
     Label one copy of the comments for the attention of Gas
Branch 2, PJ-11.2;
     Reference Docket No. CP08-14-000; and
     Mail your comments so that they will be received in
Washington, DC on or before January 11, 2008.
    The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments. See 18
Code of Federal Regulations 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on
the Commission's Internet Web site at http://www.ferc.gov under the

``eFiling'' link and the link to the User's Guide. Prepare your
submission in the same manner as you would if filing on paper and save
it to a file on your hard drive. Before you can file comments you will
need to create an account by clicking on ``Login to File'' and then
``New User Account.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing
you are making. This filing is considered a ``Comment on Filing.''
    We will mail the EA for public comment. If you are interested in
receiving it, please return the Information Request (Appendix 2). If
you do not return the Information Request, you will be taken off the
mailing list.

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an official party to the proceeding, or ``intervenor''. To
become an intervenor you must file a motion to intervene according to
Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR
385.214). Intervenors have the right to seek rehearing of the
Commission's decision. Motions to Intervene should be electronically
submitted using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov.

Persons without Internet access should send an original and 14 copies
of their motion to the Secretary of the Commission at the address
indicated previously. Persons filing Motions to Intervene on or before
the comment deadline indicated above must send a copy of the motion to
the Applicant. All filings, including late interventions, submitted
after the comment deadline must be served on the Applicant and all
other intervenors identified on the Commission's service list for this
proceeding. Persons on the service list with email addresses may be
served electronically; others must be served a hard copy of the filing.
    Affected landowners and parties with environmental concerns may be
granted intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they
have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which would not be
adequately represented by any other parties. You do not need intervenor
status to have your environmental comments considered.

Environmental Mailing List

    An effort is being made to send this notice to all individuals,
organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially
affected by the proposed project. This includes all landowners who own
homes within distances defined in the Commission's regulations of
certain aboveground facilities.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at 1-866-208-FERC or on the
FERC Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) using the ``eLibrary''

link. Click on the eLibrary link, then on ``General Search'' and enter
the docket number excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number
field. Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,

contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries and direct links to
the documents. Go to http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.

    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx
 along with other related information.

 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-24413 Filed 12-17-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 88 (Monday, May 7, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26822-26824]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10866]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2012-0068]

Pipeline Safety: Verification of Records

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: Notice; Issuance of Advisory Bulletin.

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

SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing an Advisory Bulletin to remind operators of
gas and hazardous liquid pipeline facilities to verify their records
relating to operating specifications for maximum allowable operating
pressure (MAOP) required by 49 CFR 192.517 and maximum operating
pressure (MOP) required by 49 CFR 195.310. This Advisory Bulletin
informs gas operators of anticipated changes in annual reporting
requirements to document the confirmation of MAOP, how they will be
required to report total mileage and mileage with adequate records,
when they must report, and what PHMSA considers an adequate record. In
addition, this Advisory Bulletin informs hazardous liquid operators of
adequate records for the confirmation of MOP.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Gale by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Information about PHMSA may be found at
http://phmsa.dot.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On January 10, 2011, PHMSA issued Advisory Bulletin 11-01. This
Advisory Bulletin reminded operators that if they are relying on the
review of design, construction, inspection, testing and other related
data to establish MAOP and MOP, they must ensure that the records used
are reliable, traceable, verifiable, and complete. If such a document
and records search, review, and verification cannot be satisfactorily
completed, the operator cannot rely on this method for calculating MAOP
or MOP and must instead rely on another method as allowed in 49 CFR
192.619 or 49 CFR 195.406.
    Section 192.619 currently contains four methods for establishing
MAOP: (1) The design pressure of the weakest element in the segment;
(2) pressure testing; (3) the highest actual operating pressure in the
five years prior to the segment becoming subject to regulation under
Part 192; and (4) the maximum safe pressure considering the history of
the segment, particularly known corrosion and the actual operating

pressure. The third method, often referred to as the ``grandfather
clause,'' allows pipelines that had safely operated prior to the
pipeline safety MAOP regulations to continue to operate under similar
conditions without retroactively applying recordkeeping requirements or
requiring pressure tests.
    Many of the pipelines being newly subjected to safety regulation in
the 1970's were relatively new and had demonstrated a safe operating
history. PHMSA is now considering whether these pipelines should be
pressure tested to verify continued safe MAOP. In its August 20, 2011,
accident investigation report on the September 9, 2010, Pacific Gas and
Electric Company natural gas transmission pipeline rupture and fire,
the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommended that PHMSA
should:

    Amend Title 49 CFR 192.619 to delete the grandfather clause and
require that all gas transmission pipelines constructed before 1970
be subjected to a hydrostatic pressure test that incorporates a
spike test. (P-11-14)

    PHMSA will be addressing this recommendation in a future
rulemaking.
    On January 3, 2012, President Obama signed the Pipeline Safety,
Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 (Act), which
requires PHMSA to direct each owner or operator of a gas transmission
pipeline and associated facilities to provide verification that their
records accurately reflect MAOP of their pipelines within Class 3 and
Class 4 locations and in Class 1 and Class 2 locations in High
Consequence Areas (HCAs). Beginning in 2013, PHMSA intends to require
operators to submit data regarding verification of records in these
class locations via the Gas Transmission and Gathering Systems Annual
Report.
    Operators of both gas and hazardous liquid pipelines should review
their records to determine whether they are adequate to support
operating parameters and conditions on their pipeline systems or if
additional action is needed to confirm those parameters and assure
safety. The Research and Special Programs Administration and the
Materials Transportation Bureau, PHMSA's predecessor agencies,
recognized the importance of verifying MAOP. Prior to 1996, there was a
regulatory requirement titled: ``Initial Determination of Class
Location and Confirmation or Establishment of Maximum Allowable
Operating Pressure'' at 49 CFR 192.607. This regulation required
operators to confirm the MAOP on their systems relative to class
locations no later than January 1, 1973. The regulatory requirement was
removed in 1996 because the compliance dates had long since passed.
PHMSA believes documentation that was used to confirm MAOP in
compliance with this requirement may be useful in the current
verification effort.

Advisory Bulletin (ADB-2012-06)

    To: Owners and Operators of Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
Systems.
    Subject: Verification of Records Establishing MAOP and MOP.
    Advisory: As directed in the Act, PHMSA will require each owner or
operator of a gas transmission pipeline and associated facilities to
verify that their records confirm MAOP of their pipelines within Class
3 and Class 4 locations and in Class 1 and Class 2 locations in HCAs.
    PHMSA intends to require gas pipeline operators to submit data
regarding mileage of pipelines with verifiable records and mileage of
pipelines without records in the annual reporting cycle for 2013. On
April 13, 2012, (77 FR 22387) PHMSA published a Federal Register Notice
titled: ``Information Collection Activities, Revision to Gas
Transmission and Gathering Pipeline Systems Annual Report, Gas
Transmission and Gathering Pipeline Systems Incident Report, and
Hazardous Liquid Pipelines Systems Accident Report.'' PHMSA plans to
use information from the 2013 Gas Transmission and Gathering Pipeline
Systems Annual Report to develop potential rulemaking for cases in
which the records of the owner or operator are insufficient to confirm
the established MAOP of a pipeline segment within Class 3 and Class 4
locations and in Class 1 and Class 2 locations in HCAs. Owners and
operators should consider the guidance in this advisory for all
pipeline segments and take action as appropriate to assure that all
MAOP and MOP are supported by records that are traceable, verifiable
and complete.
    Information needed to support establishment of MAOP and MOP is
identified in Sec.  192.619, Sec.  192.620 and Sec.  195.406. An owner
or operator of a pipeline must meet the recordkeeping requirements of
Part 192 and Part 195 in support of MAOP and MOP determination.
    Traceable records are those which can be clearly linked to original
information about a pipeline segment or facility. Traceable records
might include pipe mill records, purchase requisition, or as-built
documentation indicating minimum pipe yield strength, seam type, wall
thickness and diameter. Careful attention should be given to records
transcribed from original documents as they may contain errors.
Information from a transcribed document, in many cases, should be
verified with complementary or supporting documents.
    Verifiable records are those in which information is confirmed by
other complementary, but separate, documentation. Verifiable records
might include contract specifications for a pressure test of a line
segment complemented by pressure charts or field logs. Another example
might include a purchase order to a pipe mill with pipe specifications
verified by a metallurgical test of a coupon pulled from the same pipe
segment. In general, the only acceptable use of an affidavit would be
as a complementary document, prepared and signed at the time of the
test or inspection by an individual who would have reason to be
familiar with the test or inspection.
    Complete records are those in which the record is finalized as
evidenced by a signature, date or other appropriate marking. For
example, a complete pressure testing record should identify a specific
segment of pipe, who conducted the test, the duration of the test, the
test medium, temperatures, accurate pressure readings, and elevation
information as applicable. An incomplete record might reflect that the
pressure test was initiated, failed and restarted without conclusive
indication of a successful test. A record that cannot be specifically
linked to an individual pipe segment is not a complete record for that
segment. Incomplete or partial records are not an adequate basis for
establishing MAOP or MOP. If records are unknown or unknowable, a more
conservative approach is indicated.
    PHMSA is aware that other types of records may be acceptable and
that certain state programs may have additional requirements. Operators
should ensure all records establish confidence in the validity of the
records. If a document and records search, review, and verification
cannot be satisfactorily completed to meet the need for traceable,
verifiable, and complete records, the operator may need to conduct
other activities such as in-situ examination, measuring yield and
tensile strength, pressure testing, and nondestructive testing or
otherwise verify the characteristics of the pipeline to support a MAOP
or MOP determination.
    PHMSA is supportive of the use of alternative technologies to
verify pipe characteristics. Owners and operators seeking to use
alternative or non-traditional technologies in the determination of
MAOP or MOP, or to

meet other regulatory requirements, should first discuss the proposed
approach with the appropriate state or Federal regulatory agencies to
determine its acceptability under regulatory requirements.
    PHMSA will issue more direction regarding how operators will be
required to bring into compliance gas and hazardous liquid pipelines
without verifiable records for the entire mileage of the pipeline.
Further details will also be provided on the manner in which PHMSA
intends to require operators to reestablish MAOP as discussed in
Section 23(a) of the Act.
    Finally, PHMSA notes that on September 26, 2011, NTSB issued
Recommendation P-11-14: Eliminating Grandfather Clause. Section
192.619(a)(3) allows gas transmission operators to establish MAOP of
pipe installed before July 1, 1970, by use of records noting the
highest actual operating pressure to which the segment was subjected
during the five years preceding July 1, 1970. NTSB Recommendation P-11-
14 requests that PHMSA delete Sec.  192.619(a)(3), also known as the
``grandfather clause,'' and require gas transmission pipeline operators
to reestablish MAOP using hydrostatic pressure testing. PHMSA reminds
operators that this recommendation will be acted upon following the
collection of data, including information from the 2013 Gas
Transmission and Gathering Pipeline Systems Annual Report, which will
allow PHMSA to determine the impact of the requested change on the
public and industry in conformance with our statutory obligations.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 1, 2012.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Field Operations.
[FR Doc. 2012-10866 Filed 5-4-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register: October 8, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 194)]
[Notices]
[Page 51843]
[DOCID:fr08oc09-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings No. 2

September 29, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
    Docket Numbers: RP09-611-003.
    Applicants: Carolina Gas Transmission Corporation.
    Description: Carolina Gas Transmission Corporation submits Third
Substitute Second Revised Sheet 212 to FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume
1, to be effective 8/1/09.
    Filed Date: 09/24/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090925-0009.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 06, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-194-001.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company.
    Description: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company submits Fourth Revised
Sheet No 158 to FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume No 1.
    Filed Date: 09/25/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090925-0027.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, October 07, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-737-002.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company.
    Description: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company submits Twelfth Revised
Sheet No 347 to FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume No 1.
    Filed Date: 09/25/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090925-0028.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, October 07, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP96-312-200.
    Applicants: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company.
    Description: Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company submits a gas
transportation agreement and negotiated rate letter agreement between
Tennessee and Energy North Natural Gas, Inc.
    Filed Date: 09/25/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090925-0030.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, October 07, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-980-001.
    Applicants: Enbridge Pipelines (Midla) L.L.C.
    Description: Enbridge Pipelines (Midla) LLC submits Original Sheet
369 of its FERC Gas, Tariff Fifth Revised Volume 1, to be effective 10/
01/09.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090928-0085.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 13, 2009.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18
CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests
must be filed on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all
the parties to the proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons
unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Jr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-24272 Filed 10-7-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 135 (Monday, July 17, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32616-32618]
[FR Doc No: 2017-14936]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 23

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0702; Special Conditions No. 23-282-SC]

Special Conditions: Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., PC-24; Electronic
Engine Control (EEC)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Pilatus Aircraft
Ltd. PC-24 airplane. This airplane will have a novel or unusual design
features associated with installation of an electronic engine control.
The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These special
conditions contain the additional safety standards that the
Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety
equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: These special conditions are effective July 17, 2017 and are
applicable beginning July 6, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2017-0702
using any of the following methods:
    [squ] Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov
and follow the online instructions for sending your comments
electronically.
    [squ] Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    [squ] Hand Delivery of Courier: Take comments to Docket Operations
in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m., and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
    [squ] Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://regulations.gov, including any personal information
the commenter provides. Using the search function of the docket Web
site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all comments
received into any FAA docket, including the name of the individual
sending the comment (or signing the comment for an association,
business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement can
be found in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m., and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Pretz, ACE-111, Federal Aviation
Administration, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service, 901 Locust Street, Kansas City, MO 64106; telephone (816) 329-
3239; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has determined, in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and 553(d)(3), that notice and opportunity for
prior public comment hereon are unnecessary because the substance of
these special conditions has been subject to the public comment process
in several prior instances with no substantive comments received. The
FAA therefore finds good cause exists for making these special
conditions effective upon issuance.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Special condition No.\2\              Company/airplane model
------------------------------------------------------------------------
23-264-SC.............................  Honda Aircraft Company/Model HA-
                                         420.
23-267-SC.............................  Cirrus Design Corporation/Model
                                         SF50.
23-268-SC.............................  Korean Aircraft Industries/Model
                                         K-100.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments Invited
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See http://rgl.faa.gov/ to view the listed special
conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. We ask
that you send us two copies of written comments.
    We will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing
date for comments. We will consider comments filed late if it is
possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change
these special conditions based on the comments we receive.

Background

    On July 9th 2012, Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. applied for a type
certificate for their new PC-24 airplane. The PC-24 is an aluminum
pressurized low-wing business jet with a T-tail configuration and
retractable undercarriage designed to meet the commuter category
requirements of part 23. Two Williams International FJ44-4A Turbofan
engines rated at 3,400 pounds (lbs.) of take-off thrust, situated in
nacelles on each side of the rear fuselage power the PC-24. The PC-24
will have a Maximum Take-off Weight (MTOW) of 17,200 pounds (7,802
kilograms). It has a maximum seating capacity of up to ten passengers
and one or two pilots. The airplane will be certificated for day and
night Visual Flight Rules and Instrument Flight Rules and approval for
flight into known icing.
    The PC-24 airplane's two Williams International FJ44-4A turbofan
engines each use an electronic engine control system (EEC)--commonly
referred to as a Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC)--instead
of a traditional mechanical control system. Even though the engine
control system will be certificated as part of the engine, the
installation of an engine with an electronic control system requires
evaluation due to critical environmental effects and possible effects
on or by other airplane systems. Examples of critical environmental
effects include--
     Indirect effects of lightning;
     Radio interference with other airplane electronic systems;
and

     Shared engine, airplane data, and power sources.
    The regulatory requirements in part 23 for evaluating the
installation of complex systems--including electronic systems and
critical environmental effects--are contained in Sec. Sec.  23.1306,
23.1308, and 23.1309. However, when Sec.  23.1309 was published, the
use of electronic control systems for engines was not envisioned. The
integral nature of these systems makes it necessary to properly
evaluate the airplane functions included in the EEC and ensure the
installation does not degrade the EEC reliability, both of which are
approved under 14 CFR part 33. Sections 23.1306(a) and 23.1308(a) apply
to the EEC to ensure it remains equivalent to a mechanical system,
which is not generally susceptible to the HIRF and lightning
environments.
    In some cases, the airplane--in which the engine is being
installed--will determine a higher classification than the engine
controls are certificated for; requiring the EEC systems be analyzed at
a higher classification. As of November 2005, EEC special conditions
mandated the Sec.  23.1309 classification for loss of EEC control as
catastrophic for any airplane. This is not to imply an engine failure
is classified as catastrophic, but that the EEC must provide an
equivalent reliability to mechanical engine controls. In addition,
Sec. Sec.  23.1141(e) and 25.901(b)(2) are applied to provide the fault
tolerant design requirements of turbine engine mechanical controls to
the EEC and ensure adequate EEC inspection and maintenance intervals.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.17, Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., must
show that the PC-24 meets the applicable provisions of part 23, as
amended by amendments 23-1 through 23-62 thereto.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 23) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the PC-24 because of a novel or
unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under the
provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the PC-24 must comply with the fuel vent and exhaust
emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34, the noise certification
requirements of 14 CFR part 36, and the FAA must issue a finding of
regulatory adequacy pursuant to section 611 of Public Law 92-574, the
``Noise Control Act of 1972.''
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in Sec.  11.19, under
Sec.  11.38 and they become part of the type certification basis under
Sec.  21.17(a)(2).
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same novel or
unusual design feature, the FAA would apply these special conditions to
the other models under Sec.  21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The PC-24 will incorporate the following novel or unusual design
features:
    Electronic Engine Control System.

Discussion

    As discussed in the ``Background'' section, the PC-24 will use an
EEC system instead of a traditional mechanical control system, which is
a novel design for this type of airplane. The applicable airworthiness
regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for
this design feature. Mandating a structured assessment to determine
potential installation issues mitigates the concerns that the addition
of an electronic engine control may produce failure conditions not
previously considered.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
PC-24. Should Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. apply at a later date for a change
to the type certificate to include another model on the same type
certificate incorporating the same novel or unusual design feature, the
FAA would apply these special conditions to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on one model of airplanes. It is not a rule of general applicability
and it affects only the applicant who applied to the FAA for approval
of these features on the airplane.
    The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the
notice and comments period in several prior instances--identified
above--and has been derived without substantive change from those
previously issued. It is unlikely that prior public comment would
result in a significant change from the substance contained herein.
Therefore, notice and opportunity for prior public comments hereon are
unnecessary and the FAA finds good cause, in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B) and 553(d)(3), making these special conditions effective
upon issuance. The FAA is requesting comments to allow interested
persons to submit views that may not have been submitted in response to
the prior opportunities for comment described above.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 23

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Signs and symbols.

Citation

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113 and 44701; 14 CFR
21.16 and 21.17; and 14 CFR 11.38 and 11.19.

The Special Conditions

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. PC-24 airplanes.
    1. Electronic Engine Control.
    (a) For electronic engine control system installations, it must be
established that no single failure or malfunction or probable
combinations of failures of EEC system components will have an effect
on the system--as installed in the airplane--that causes the loss-of-
thrust-control (LOTC) probability of the system to exceed those allowed
in part 33 certification.
    (b) Electronic engine control system installations must be
evaluated for environmental and atmospheric conditions, including
lightning. The EEC system lightning and HIRF effects that result in
LOTC should be considered catastrophic.
    (c) The components of the installation must be constructed,
arranged, and installed to ensure their continued safe operation
between normal inspections or overhauls.
    (d) Functions incorporated into any electronic engine control that
make it part of any equipment, system, or installation whose functions
are beyond that of basic engine control, and which may also introduce
system failures and malfunctions, are not exempt from Sec.  23.1309 and
must be shown to meet part 23 levels of safety as derived from Sec.
23.1309. Part 33 certification data--if applicable--may be used to show
compliance with any part 23 requirements. If part 33 data is to be used
to substantiate compliance with part 23 requirements, then the
applicant must provide this data to show compliance.

    Note: The term ``probable'' in the context of ``probable
combination of failures'' does not have the same meaning as in AC
23.1309-1E, ``System Safety Analysis and

Assessment for Part 23 Airplanes.'' The term ``probable'' in
``probable combination of failures'' means ``foreseeable,'' or--in
AC 23.1309-1E terms--``not extremely improbable.''

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri on July 6, 2017.
Kelly Broadway,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-14936 Filed 7-14-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 198 (Monday, October 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48074-48075]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22366]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2003-0004; FRL-9967-58]

Access to Confidential Business Information by Patriot L.L.C. and
Its Identified Subcontractor, Vision Technologies, Inc.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA has authorized its contractor, Patriot L.L.C. of Columbia,
MD, and Vision Technologies, Inc. (VTI) of Glen Burnie, MD, its
identified subcontractor to access information which has been submitted
to EPA under all sections of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
Some of the information may be claimed or determined to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI).

DATES: Access to the confidential data will occur no sooner than
October 23, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For technical information contact: Scott Sherlock, Environmental
Assistance Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(202) 564-8257; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. This action may,
however, be of interest to all who manufacture, process, or distribute
industrial chemicals. Since other entities may also be interested, the
Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may
be affected by this action.

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

    The docket for this action, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2003-0004 is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center
(EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. 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 (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 566-
0280. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information
about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. What action is the Agency taking?

    Under EPA contract number HHSN316201200065W, order number
HHSN31600002, contractor Patriot L.L.C. of 9520 Berger Road, Suite 212,
Columbia, MD; and VTI of 530 McCormick Drive, Suite 6, Glen Burnie, MD
will assist EPA's Office of Research and Development by supporting the
desktop systems on which the CBI will reside. The contractor will also
provide information technology support and solutions to enhance science
and research results.
    In accordance with 40 CFR 2.306(j), EPA has determined that under
EPA contract number HHSN316201200065W, order number HHSN31600002,
Patriot and VTI will require access to CBI submitted to EPA under all
sections of TSCA to perform successfully the duties specified under the
contract. Patriot and VTI personnel will be given access to information
submitted to EPA under all section(s) of TSCA. Some of the information
may be claimed or determined to be CBI.
    EPA is issuing this notice to inform all submitters of information
under all sections of TSCA that EPA may provide Patriot and VTI access
to these CBI materials on a need-to-know basis only. All access to TSCA
CBI under this contract will take place at EPA Headquarters in
accordance with EPA's TSCA CBI Protection Manual.
    Access to TSCA data, including CBI, will continue until February
27, 2022. If the contract is extended, this access will also continue
for the duration of the extended contract without further notice.
    Patriot and VTI personnel will be required to sign nondisclosure
agreements and will be briefed on appropriate security procedures
before they are permitted access to TSCA CBI.

    Authority:  15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.

    Dated: September 13, 2017.
Pamela Myrick,
Director, Information Management Division, Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics.
[FR Doc. 2017-22366 Filed 10-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

		     WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

							                                            	  OFFICE OF

				PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

	AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

April 16, 2008

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	Preliminary Risk Assessments to Support the Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (RED) Document for
Hexahydro-1,3,5-tris(2-hydroxyethyl)-s-triazine (HHT) (Case 3074)

FROM:	Lance Wormell, Chemical Review Manager

		Regulatory Management Branch 2

Antimicrobials Division (7510P)

TO:		Public Docket EPA-HQ-OPP-2003-0250

	This document presents the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA or
“the Agency”) Case Overview and revised risk assessments for
reregistration Case 3074:
Hexahydro-1,3,5-tris(2-hydroxyethyl)-s-triazine or “HHT.”

Attachments

Attachment 1:

Hexahydro-1,3,5-tris(2-hydroxyethyl)-s-triazine (HHT).  Revised Human
Health and Ecological Effects Risk Assessments for the Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (RED) Document.  April 16, 2008.

Attachment 2:

Occupational and Residential Exposure Chapter for
Hexahydro-1,3,5-tris(2-hydroxyethyl)-s-triazine (HHT) for the
Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) Document (Case 3074).

Attachment 3:

Dietary Risk Assessment for  HHT (Grotan) for the RED Process. February
12, 2008.

Attachment 4:

Drinking Water Assessment  for HHT (Grotan) Reregistration Eligibility
Decision (RED) Process. January 30, 2008.

Attachment 5:

Ecological Hazards Assessment for Grotan. January 2, 2008.

Attachment 6:

Environmental Fate Assessment of HHT for RED. January 31, 2008.

Attachment 7:

INCIDENT REPORTS ASSOCIATED WITH
Hexahydro-1,3,5-tris(2-Hydroxyethyl)-s-Triazine. January 29, 2008.

Attachment 8:

Product Chemistry  Science Chapter of  HHT (Grotan). January 23, 2008.

Attachment 9:

Hexahydro-1,3,5-tris(2-Hydroxyethyl)-s-Triazine:  Toxicology
Disciplinary Chapter for the Issuance of the Reregistration Eligibility
Decision (RED) Document. January 30, 2008.

 PAGE  1


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 152 (Monday, August 8, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47988-47990]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19507]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 30796; Amdt. No. 3437]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports.
These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or
revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National
Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational
facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.
These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective August 8, 2011. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of August 8, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:
    For Examination--
    1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located;
    3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur
Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html. Availability_All SIAPs are
available online free of charge. Visit nfdc.faa.gov to register.
Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may
be obtained from:
    1.FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters Building,
800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; or
    2.The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harry J. Hodges, Flight Procedure
Standards Branch (AFS-420)Flight Technologies and Programs Division,
Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike

Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK. 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the
appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data
Center (FDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated
by reference in the amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and
Sec.  97.20 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
    The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a
special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register
expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory
text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts
printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP contained in FAA form documents is
unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and
specifies the types of SIAP and the corresponding effective dates. This
amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure
and the amendment number.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP as amended in the transmittal. For safety and
timeliness of change considerations, this amendment incorporates only
specific changes contained for each SIAP as modified by FDC/P-NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs, as modified by FDC P-NOTAM, and contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to
SIAPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific conditions
existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in this rule
have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an emergency
action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published
aeronautical charts. The circumstances which created the need for all
these SIAP amendments requires making them effective in less than 30
days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs
and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure
before adopting these SIAPs are impracticable and contrary to the
public interest and, where applicable, that good cause exists for
making these SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

Conclusion

    The FAA has determined that this 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 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. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, and
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 22, 2011,
John M. Allen,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal regulations, part 97, 14 CFR part 97, is amended by
amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, effective at 0901 UTC
on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120,
44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:

Sec. Sec.  97.23, 97.25, 97.27, 97.29, 97.31, 97.33, 97.35   [Amended]

    By amending: Sec.  97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or
TACAN; Sec.  97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; Sec.
97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; Sec.  97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV;
Sec.  97.31 RADAR SIAPs; Sec.  97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and Sec.  97.35 COPTER
SIAPs, identified as follows:

* * * Effective Upon Publication

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      AIRAC date             State               City                 Airport         FDC No.    FDC date                     Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25-Aug-11.............  GA              Atlanta..............  Hartfield/Jackson        1/1297    7/12/11  ILS OR LOC RWY 27L, Amdt 16.
                                                                Intl.
25-Aug-11.............  NY              New York.............  Long Island Mac          1/1400    7/12/11  RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Amdt 1.
                                                                Arthur.
25-Aug-11.............  GA              Atlanta..............  Cobb County--            1/1697    7/12/11  ILS OR LOC RWY 27, Amdt 4.
                                                                McCollum Field.
25-Aug-11.............  MA              Nantucket............  Nantucket Memorial..     1/2321    7/12/11  ILS OR LOC RWY 24, Amdt 15D.
25-Aug-11.............  HI              Lihue................  Lihue...............     1/3821    7/12/11  VOR OR TACAN RWY 35, Amdt 7.
25-Aug-11.............  IA              Dubuque..............  Dubuque Rgnl........     1/7236    7/12/11  VOR RWY 36, Amdt 6.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2011-19507 Filed 8-5-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 3, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 105]
[FR Doc No: 2011-33637]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13005-003]

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

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Original Major License.
    b. Project No.: 13005-003.
    c. Date Filed: December 14, 2011.
    d. Applicant: Oliver Hydro LLC.
    e. Name of Project: William Bacon Oliver Lock and Dam Hydroelectric
Project.
    f. Location: At the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) William
Bacon Oliver Lock and Dam on the Black Warrior River, in Tuscaloosa
County, Alabama. The project would occupy 8.7 acres of United States
lands administered by the Corps' Mobile District.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Brent Smith, Symbiotics LLC, 371 Upper
Terrace, Suite 2, Bend, OR 97702;<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Allan Creamer,<PHONE_NUMBER>; or via email 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 described 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 in order to
form an adequate factual basis for a complete analysis of the
application on its merit, the resource agency, 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: February 13, 2012.
    All documents 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/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit
brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration,
using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the
end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-(866) 208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven 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. The proposed project would utilize the existing Corps' William
Bacon Oliver Lock and Dam, and would consist of the following new
facilities: (1) A forebay; (2) an intake structure; (3) a powerhouse
containing two generating units with a total capacity of 11.72
megawatts (MW); (4) a 150-foot-long, 68-foot-wide tailrace; (5) a
proposed 1.7-mile-long, 25 kilovolt (kV) transmission line; (6) a
switchyard; and (7) appurtenant facilities. The proposed project would
have an average annual generation of 42.6 GWh, and operate run-of-river
utilizing surplus water from the William Bacon Oliver Lock & Dam, as
directed by the Corps.
    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 email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    p. Procedural schedule and final amendments: The application will
be processed according to the following Hydro Licensing Schedule.
Revisions to the schedule will be made as appropriate.

Issue Deficiency Letter--March 2012
Issue Acceptance Letter--July 2012
Issue Scoping Document 1 for comments--August 2012
Request Additional Information (if necessary)--October 2012
Issue Scoping Document 2 (if necessary)--October 2012
Notice of application is ready for environmental analysis--February
2013
Notice of the availability of the draft EA--October 2013
Notice of the availability of the final EA--April 2014

    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.

    Dated: December 23, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-33637 Filed 12-30-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 187 (Thursday, September 30, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54135-54136]
[FR Doc No: 2021-21050]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0427; Project Identifier 2008-SW-72-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Arrow Falcon Exporters, Inc.
(Previously Utah State University); California Department of Forestry;
Firefly Aviation Helicopter Services (Previously Erickson Air-Crane
Co.); Garlick Helicopters, Inc.; Global Helicopter Technology, Inc.;
Hagglund Helicopters, LLC (Previously Western International Aviation,
Inc.); International Helicopters, Inc.; Precision Helicopters, LLC;
Robinson Air Crane, Inc.; San Joaquin Helicopters (Previously Hawkins
and Powers Aviation, Inc.); S.M.&T. Aircraft (Previously US
Helicopters, Inc., UNC Helicopter, Inc., Southern Aero Corporation, and
Wilco Aviation); Smith Helicopters; Southern Helicopter, Inc.;
Southwest Florida Aviation International, Inc. (Previously Jamie R.
Hill and Southwest Florida Aviation); Tamarack Helicopters, Inc.
(Previously Ranger Helicopter Services, Inc.); US Helicopter, Inc.
(Previously UNC Helicopter, Inc.); West Coast Fabrication; and Williams
Helicopter Corporation (Previously Scott Paper Co.) Model AH-1G, AH-1S,
HH-1K, TH-1F, TH-1L, UH-1A, UH-1B, UH-1E, UH-1F, UH-1H, UH-1L, and UH-
1P Helicopters; and Southwest Florida Aviation Model UH-1B (SW204 and
SW204HP) and UH-1H (SW205) Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is withdrawing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
that proposed to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) AD 2002-20-01,
which applies to certain Model HH-1K, TH-1F, TH-1L, UH-1A, UH-1B, UH-
1E, UH-1F, UH-1H, UH-1L, and UH-1P helicopters; and Southwest Florida
Aviation Model SW204, SW204HP, SW205, and SW205A-1 helicopters,
manufactured by Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (BHTI) for the Armed
Forces of the United States. The NPRM would have required removing
certain serial-numbered tension-torsion (TT) straps from service,
reducing the retirement life for other TT straps, and establishing a
retirement life in terms of calendar time in addition to hours time-in-
service (TIS) for certain other affected TT straps. The NPRM also would
have added two model helicopters to the applicability of the AD. The
NPRM was prompted by fatigue cracking in certain TT straps that have
stainless steel filament windings and a determination that corrosion
damage, which is related to calendar time, necessitated a calendar time
retirement life for certain TT straps in addition to the retirement
life based on hours TIS. The NPRM was also prompted by fatigue cracking
in other TT straps with encased thin stainless steel plates. Since
issuance of the NPRM, the FAA has re-reviewed the available information
and determined that the totality of the available information does not
support issuance of a final rule. Accordingly, the NPRM is withdrawn.

DATES: As of September 30, 2021 the proposed rule, which was published
in the Federal Register on April 22, 2010 (75 FR 20933), is withdrawn.

ADDRESSES:

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2010-
0427; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this AD action, any comments received, and other information. The
street address for Docket Operations is U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jurgen Priester, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Delegation Oversight Section, DSCO Branch, FAA, 10101
Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The FAA issued an NPRM that proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 by
removing AD 2002-20-01, Amendment 39-12895 (67 FR 61771, October 2,
2002), which applies to restricted category Model HH-1K, TH-1F, TH-1L,
UH-1A, UH-1B, UH-1E, UH-1F, UH-1H, UH-1L, and UH-1P helicopters; and
Southwest Florida Aviation Model SW204, SW204HP, SW205, and SW205A-1
helicopters, manufactured by BHTI for the Armed Forces of the United
States. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on April 22, 2010
(75 FR 20933). The NPRM would have applied to Model AH-1G, AH-1S, HH-
1K, TH-1F, TH-1L, UH -A, UH-1B, UH-1E, UH-1F, UH-1H, UH-1L, and UH-1P
helicopters with BHTI main rotor TT strap, part number (P/N) 204-011-
113-1, 204-012-112-1, 204-012-112-5, 204-012-112-7, 204-012-122-1, 204-
012-122-5, 204 310-101-101, or Bendix Energy Controls Co. P/N 2601139,
2601399, 2601400, or 2606650, installed; and Southwest Florida Aviation
Model UH-1B (SW204 and SW204HP) and UH-1H (SW205) helicopters. The NPRM
was prompted by fatigue cracking in certain TT straps that have
stainless steel filament windings and a determination that corrosion
damage, which is related to calendar time, necessitates a calendar time
retirement life for certain TT straps in addition to the retirement
life based on hours TIS. The NPRM was also prompted by fatigue cracking
in other TT straps with encased thin stainless steel plates.
    The NPRM proposed to require removing certain serial-numbered TT
straps from service, reducing the retirement life for other TT straps,
and establishing a retirement life in terms of calendar time in
addition to hours TIS for certain other affected TT straps. The NPRM
also proposed to add two model helicopters to the applicability. The
proposed actions were intended to prevent failure of a TT strap, loss
of a main rotor blade, and subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.

Actions Since the NPRM Was Issued

    Since issuance of the NPRM, the FAA has re-reviewed the available
information and failure data used to justify issuance of the NPRM, and
reviewed the service difficulty data produced since the NPRM was
issued. Through that review, the FAA determined that there have not
been any further reported problems with the affected part number TT
straps since the NPRM was issued. Based on that review, the FAA
concluded that the totality of the available information and the lack
of additional reports does not support issuance of a final rule. The
potential unsafe condition identified as the justification for issuance
of the NPRM has not materialized. Therefore, the FAA has determined
that AD action is not appropriate.
    Withdrawal of the NPRM constitutes only such action and does not
preclude the FAA from further rulemaking on this issue, nor does it
commit the FAA to any course of action in the future.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to comment on the NPRM and
received 38 comments. The FAA received comments from individual
commenters as well as from organizations on a variety of topics,
including the costs estimates, compliance times, and requests to
withdraw the NPRM. You may examine the comments received in the AD
docket at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2010-0427.
    The FAA acknowledges these comments to the NPRM. However, because
the FAA is withdrawing the NPRM, the commenter's requests are no longer
necessary.

FAA's Conclusions

    Upon further consideration of the available information, the FAA
has determined that the NPRM is unnecessary. Accordingly, the NPRM is
withdrawn.

Regulatory Findings

    Since this action only withdraws an NPRM, it is neither a proposed
nor a final rule. This action therefore is not covered under Executive
Order 12866, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, or DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979).

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Withdrawal

0
Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking, Docket No. FAA-2010-
0427, which was published in the Federal Register on April 22, 2010 (75
FR 20933), is withdrawn.

    Issued on September 23, 2021.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-21050 Filed 9-29-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P