[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 222 (Monday, November 20, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55032-55037]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24810]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-1023; Product Identifier 2017-NM-144-AD; Amendment
39-19104; AD 2017-23-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2017-19-17,
which applied to certain Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 900EX and
FALCON 2000EX airplanes. AD 2017-19-17 required revising the airplane
flight manual (AFM) to include procedures to follow when an airplane is
operating in icing conditions. AD 2017-19-17 also required a detailed
inspection of the wing anti-ice system ducting for the presence of a
diaphragm, and follow-on actions (replacement of ducting or re-
identification of the ducting part marking). This new AD retains the
actions required by AD 2017-19-17, and corrects the follow-on actions
for certain airplanes. This AD was prompted by a determination that the
follow-on actions specified in AD 2017-19-17 were incorrect for certain
airplanes. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: This AD is effective December 1, 2017.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of October 27,
2017 (82 FR 44305, September 22, 2017).
    We must receive comments on this AD by January 2, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, 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.
    For service information identified in this final rule, contact
Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box 2000,
South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue
SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2017-1023.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1023; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
800-647-5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 425-227-
1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued AD 2017-19-17, Amendment 39-19047 (82 FR 44305, September
22, 2017) (``AD 2017-19-17''), which applied to certain Dassault
Aviation Model FALCON 900EX and FALCON 2000EX airplanes. AD 2017-19-17
superseded AD 2016-17-02, Amendment 39-18615 (81 FR 55366, August 19,
2016). AD 2017-19-17 was prompted by a design review of in-production
airplanes that identified a deficiency in certain wing anti-ice system
ducting. AD 2017-19-17 required revision of the AFM to include
procedures to follow when an airplane is operating in icing conditions,
the detailed inspection of the wing anti-ice system ducting for the
presence of a diaphragm, and replacement of ducting or re-
identification of the ducting part marking. We issued AD 2017-19-17 to
detect and correct a deficiency in the wing anti-ice system ducting,
which could result in reduced performance of the wing anti-ice system
with potential ice accretion and ingestion, and could result in
degraded engine power and degraded handling characteristics.
    Since we issued AD 2017-19-17, we found that the follow-on actions
specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and (h)(2) of AD 2017-19-17 are correct
for Model FALCON 900EX airplanes. However, for Model FALCON 2000EX
airplanes, the follow-on actions specified in paragraphs (h)(1) and
(h)(2) of AD 2017-19-17 would be dependent on different conditions than
those specified for Model FALCON 900EX airplanes. This AD corrects
those actions for Model FALCON 2000EX airplanes.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA
Emergency AD 2016-0130-E, dated July 5, 2016 (referred to after this as
the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''),
to correct an unsafe condition for certain Dassault Aviation Model
FALCON 900EX and FALCON 2000EX airplanes. The MCAI states:

    A design review of in production aeroplanes identified a
manufacturing deficiency of some wing anti-ice system ducting.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to an
undetected reduced performance of the wing anti-ice system, with
potential ice accretion and ingestion, possibly resulting in
degraded engine power and degraded handling characteristics.
    The Falcon 900EX EASY and Falcon * * * [2000EX] Aircraft Flight
Manuals (AFM) contain a normal procedure 4-200-05A, ``Operations in
Icing Conditions'', addressing minimum fan speed rotation (N1)
during combined operation of wing anti-ice and engine anti-ice
systems. The subsequent investigation demonstrated that the wing
anti-ice system performance for aeroplanes equipped with ducting
affected by the manufacturing deficiency can be restored increasing
N1 value. In addition, Dassault Aviation published Service Bulletin
(SB) F900EX-464 (for Falcon 900EX aeroplanes) and SB F2000EX-393
(for Falcon 2000EX aeroplanes), providing instructions for wing
anti-ice system ducting inspection.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires an AFM
amendment and a one-time [detailed] inspection of the wing anti-ice
system ducting [and, as applicable, a check of the part number,]
and, depending on findings, re-identification or replacement of the
wing anti-ice system ducting.

    You may examine the MCAI on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1023.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Dassault has issued Service Bulletin F900EX-464, dated June 20,
2016; and Service Bulletin F2000EX-393, dated June 20, 2016. This
service information describes procedures for an inspection of the wing
anti-ice system ducting and re-identification or replacement of the
wing anti-ice system ducting. These documents are distinct since they
apply to different airplane models. This service information is
reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are issuing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined the unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of these
same type designs.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    We determined that AD 2017-19-17 contains an error in the
description of follow-on actions that could allow the identified unsafe
condition to continue for Model FALCON 2000EX airplanes. This AD
corrects the follow-on actions for the Model FALCON 2000EX airplanes.
No other changes have been made to AD 2017-19-17. Therefore, we
determined that notice and opportunity for public comment before
issuing this AD are unnecessary and that good cause exists for making
this amendment effective in fewer than 30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2017-1023; Product
Identifier 2017-NM-144-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD because of
those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 52 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    The action required by AD 2017-19-17, and retained in this AD,
takes about 5 work-hours per product, at an average labor rate of $85
per work-hour. Based on these figures, the estimated cost of the action
that is required by AD 2017-19-17 is $425 per product. This AD adds no
new economic burden to AD 2017-19-17.
    We also estimate that any necessary follow-on actions will take
about 19 work-hours and require parts costing $24,000, for a cost of
$25,615 per product. We have no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these 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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to
the Director of the System Oversight Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing airworthiness directive (AD)
2017-19-17, Amendment 39-19047 (82 FR 44305, September 22, 2017), and
adding the following new AD:

2017-23-10 Dassault Aviation: Amendment 39-19104; Docket No. FAA-
2017-1023; Product Identifier 2017-NM-144-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective December 1, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2017-19-17, Amendment 39-19047 (82 FR 44305,
September 22, 2017) (``AD 2017-19-17'').

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the Dassault Aviation airplanes identified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, certificated in any
category.
    (1) Model FALCON 900EX airplanes, serial numbers (S/Ns) 270
through 291 inclusive and 294.
    (2) Model FALCON 2000EX airplanes, S/Ns 263 through 305
inclusive, 307 through 313 inclusive, 315, 320, and 701 through 734
inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 30, Ice and rain
protection.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a design review of in-production
airplanes that identified a deficiency in certain wing anti-ice
system ducting. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct a
deficiency in the wing anti-ice system ducting, which could result
in reduced performance of the wing anti-ice system with potential
ice accretion and ingestion, and could result in degraded engine
power and degraded handling characteristics.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Revision to the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), With No
Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD
2017-19-17, with no changes.
    (1) For Model FALCON 900EX airplanes on which the actions
specified in Dassault Service Bulletin F900EX-464 have not been
accomplished: Within 10 flight cycles after September 6, 2016 (the
effective date of AD 2016-17-02, Amendment 39-18615 (81 FR 55366,
August 19, 2016) (``AD 2016-17-02'')), revise Section 4-200-05A,
``OPERATION IN ICING CONDITIONS,'' of the Model FALCON 900EX AFM to
include the information in figure 1 to paragraph (g)(1) of this AD,
and thereafter operate the airplane accordingly. The AFM revision
may be done by inserting a copy of this AD into the AFM.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR20NO17.000

    (2) For Model FALCON 2000EX airplanes on which the actions
specified in Dassault Service Bulletin F2000EX-393 have not been
accomplished: Within 10 flight cycles after September 6, 2016 (the
effective date of AD 2016-17-02), revise Section 4-200-05A,
``OPERATION IN ICING CONDITIONS,'' of the Model FALCON 2000EX AFM to
include the information in figure 2 to paragraph (g)(2) of this AD,
and thereafter operate the airplane accordingly. The AFM revision
may be done by inserting a copy of this AD into the AFM.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR20NO17.001

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C

(h) Retained Inspection, Part Replacement, Part Re-identification, With
Revised Affected Airplanes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (h) of AD
2017-19-17, with revised affected airplanes. For Model FALCON 900EX
airplanes: Within 9 months after October 27, 2017 (the effective
date of AD 2017-19-17), do a detailed inspection of the wing anti-
ice system ducting (anti-ice pipe) for the presence of a diaphragm,
and do

all applicable actions specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of
this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Dassault Service Bulletin F900EX-464, dated June 20, 2016. After the
applicable actions specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this
AD have been completed, the AFM revision required by paragraph (g)
of this AD may be removed from the AFM for that airplane.
    (1) If during the inspection required by the introductory text
to paragraph (h) of this AD it is determined that a diaphragm is
present: Before further flight, replace the wing anti-ice system
ducting.
    (2) If during the inspection required by the introductory text
to paragraph (h) of this AD it is determined that a diaphragm is not
present: Before further flight, do a check of the anti-ice pipe part
number and re-identify the wing anti-ice system ducting.

(i) New Actions: Inspection, Part Replacement, Part Re-identification

    For Model FALCON 2000EX airplanes: Within 9 months after the
effective date of this AD, do a detailed inspection of the wing
anti-ice system ducting (anti-ice pipe) for the presence of a
diaphragm, and do all applicable actions specified in paragraph
(i)(1) or (i)(2) of this AD, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Dassault Service Bulletin F2000EX-393, dated June
20, 2016. After the applicable actions specified in paragraph (i)(1)
or (i)(2) of this AD have been completed, the AFM revision required
by paragraph (g) of this AD may be removed from the AFM for that
airplane.
    (1) If during the inspection required by the introductory text
to paragraph (i) of this AD it is determined that a diaphragm is not
present: Before further flight, replace the wing anti-ice system
ducting.
    (2) If during the inspection required by the introductory text
to paragraph (i) of this AD it is determined that a diaphragm is
present: Before further flight, do a check of the anti-ice pipe part
number and re-identify the wing anti-ice system ducting.

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Section, send it to the attention of
the person identified in paragraph (k)(2) of this AD. Information
may be emailed to: [email protected]. Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA; or the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA); or Dassault Aviation's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(k) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) EASA Emergency AD 2016-0130-E, dated July 5, 2016, for
related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2017-1023.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Tom Rodriguez,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone
425-227-1137; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
October 27, 2017 (82 FR 44305, September 22, 2017).
    (i) Dassault Aviation Service Bulletin F900EX-464, dated June
20, 2016.
    (ii) Dassault Aviation Service Bulletin F2000EX-393, dated June
20, 2016.
    (4) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box 2000,
South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet http://www.dassaultfalcon.com.
    (5) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (6) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 7, 2017.
Dionne Palermo,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-24810 Filed 11-17-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


ICR Supporting Statement
Information Collection Request for EPA Application Materials for the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act
OMB Control No. 2040-0292, EPA ICR No. 2549.02

A.  Justification.

       Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.  Identify any legal or administrative requirements that necessitate the collection.

      The collection of information is necessary to receive applications for credit assistance pursuant to section 5024 of the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) of 2014, 33 USC 3903. The purpose of the WIFIA program is to provide Federal credit assistance in the form of direct loans and loan guarantees to eligible clean water and drinking water projects. In addition, America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018 passed on October 10, 2018 reauthorized the WIFIA program and created a separate loan program specifically for State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs. Therefore, the collection of information is necessary to receive applications for the SRF WIFIA (SWIFIA) program currently under development, pending appropriation.

      WIFIA requires that an eligible entity shall submit to the Administrator an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such information, as the Secretary or the Administrator may require to receive assistance under WIFIA. To satisfy these requirements, EPA must collect a Letter of Interest (LOI) and an application from entities seeking funding. The relevant section of WIFIA is attached hereto as Exhibit A. EPA is publishing a Federal Register Notice to give entities an opportunity to submit application materials upon appropriation of funding for the WIFIA program and/or the SWIFIA program. This collection is necessary to determine whether each proposed project meets creditworthiness and other Federal requirements to receive WIFIA credit assistance.

 2.	Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be used. Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use the agency has made of the information received from the current collection.

      The LOI and the application for the base WIFIA program and SWIFIA program (attached as Exhibits B, C, D, E, and F) collected from prospective borrowers through this solicitation will be used to evaluate applications for credit assistance under the WIFIA eligibility requirements and selection criteria as outlined in the annual Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA).

3.	Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g. permitting electronic submission of responses, and the basis for the decision for adopting this means of collection. Also describe any consideration of using information technology to reduce burden.

	The LOI form is available electronically. To reduce burden and reduce the number of copies required, the LOI and supporting documents are submitted via WIFIA's SharePoint site or e-mail. The application is available electronically. It is also submitted electronically via WIFIA's SharePoint site.

 4.	Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purpose(s) described in item 2 above.

      The LOIs and applications will generally be project specific and the information is not available elsewhere. Applicants may reference documents that already exist and submit the documents as attachments as part of the LOI and application process.

 5.	If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other small entities (item 5 of the OMB form 83-1), describe the methods used to minimize burden.

      Eligible applicants under WIFIA include corporations, partnerships, joint ventures, trusts, Federal, State, or local governmental entities, agencies, or instrumentalities, tribal governments or consortium of tribal governments, and state infrastructure financing authorities, which could include small entities. LOIs and applications are voluntary. EPA cannot minimize the burden to small entities because WIFIA requires all eligible entities to submit an application in order to receive credit assistance. The relevant section of WIFIA is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

 6.	Describe the consequence to federal program or policy activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to reducing burden.

      If the collection is not conducted, EPA will be unable to satisfy the statutory mandate to require the submission of applications. Therefore, WIFIA credit assistance will not be available. To provide credit assistance to eligible projects, which is the purpose of the program, EPA must collect letters of interest and applications that respond to the eligibility requirements and selection criteria.

 7.	Explain any special circumstances that would cause an information collection to be conducted in a manner inconsistent with 5 CFR 1320.6:

      There are no special circumstances. The collection of information is conducted in a manner consistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.6.

8.	Efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views

      On April 23, 2019, Vol. 84, No. 78, pages 16850 to 16851, the Agency published the notice of information collection and request for comments in the Federal Register. The solicitation is attached as Exhibit G. One (1) comment was received from the Council of Infrastructure Financing Authorities.

      In addition, EPA consulted with six (6) borrowers or applicants for the base program and two (2) prospective borrowers for SWIFIA to obtain their views on the availability of data, frequency of recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting format, and on the data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported.

      EPA appreciates the feedback that it received during the consultation process. As a result, several changes were made to the supporting statement as well as the draft letters of interest and draft applications for both the base and SWIFIA programs.

      Base Program
      In the six consultations done with borrowers and applicants for the base program, borrowers and applicants were overall very satisfied with the changes made to both the LOI and the application as part of this renewal process. The borrowers and applicants commented that burden in the LOI was less than the original LOI, due to the reduced amount of information required in the engineering and credit sections. Several borrowers and applicants also commented positively on the restructured selection criteria section, saying it would be easier to answer the direct questions in the new section compared to the language directly from the WIFIA statute in the current version of the LOI.

      For the application, borrowers and applicants commented that they generally liked the new answer choices compared to the current application which has mostly write-in answers. Borrowers and applicants also commented that this new application would likely be more burdensome upfront but could save time later in the process by being asked for all the information EPA requires in the application.

      For the application materials, EPA appreciates the suggestions it received for clarifying certain questions and making the application form more inclusive of prospective borrowers who will be submitting multiple projects under one LOI and application.

      For the base program, most of the comments from the consultations focused on the application. EPA added language in some of the questions' instructions to allow for the borrower to provide information in different ways. For example, EPA is allowing the borrower, in most cases, to reference an attachment instead of providing written description to reduce burden. In another effort to reduce burden, EPA is also clarifying instructions for questions that need more detailed information, to clarify that alternative metrics may be provided. EPA also received comments from the consultations that it will be easier to complete the application for multiple contracts under one loan. Due to this feedback, EPA decided to move Section E (previously Project Information, renamed Contract Information) to an additional form, an Excel spreadsheet, so applicants can provide information for multiple contracts using different rows. These changes for the updated LOI and application are included as Exhibits B, C, and D.

      SWIFIA Program

      EPA acknowledges that all SRFs that meet the eligibility requirements for the capitalization grant and all agencies who participate in administering the SRFs are allowed to apply for SWIFIA financing. EPA clarified the definition of State Infrastructure Financing Authorities to make it clear that it includes agencies who participate in administering the SRFs in the application materials instructions.

      EPA received several comments about eliminating or streamlining the LOI. However, EPA does not agree that allowing all agencies who participate in administering the SRF to apply eliminates the need for a LOI or that it can accept the Intended Use Plans instead of a LOI. EPA is required to select loan recipients based on criteria outlined by statute. Based on feedback, EPA has shortened the LOI considerably and now requests only the submission of basic program and contact information, the amount of the loan being requested, the requested loan structure, and key program documents. The changes are included as Exhibit D. As a result, EPA decreased its burden estimate for SWIFIA prospective borrowers to complete a LOI to 5 hours as noted in EPA's updated response to question 12.

      EPA appreciates the feedback regarding the documentation that SRF programs already complete as requirements of its annual capitalization grant. As a result, EPA eliminated some questions in the SRF application form related to information provided in those documents, particularly related to the program's engineering review processes, and clarified the instruction to include that those documents could be references where narrative responses are still requested. In addition, at respondents' suggestions, it added the requirement to submit the program's Operating Agreement. EPA will still require that the most recent versions of those documents be provided in the LOI and application. The changes are included as Exhibit E and F. The reduced burden is included in EPA's updated responses to questions 12 and 13.

      In addition, EPA appreciates the numerous suggestions it received for making the instructions and questions clearer. It incorporated these changes into the updated LOI and application included as Exhibit E and F. In particular, EPA clarified language to make it clear when it is referring to the SRF sub-loans versus the SWIFIA loan. It also updated the instructions for both documents.

      EPA also received a comment that the fee estimates are likely too high for SWIFIA borrowers. In the SWIFIA program, prospective borrowers will either accept EPA's standard terms or EPA will adopt the prospective borrower's existing indenture. Therefore, the fees should be less. EPA agrees with this comment and reduced its estimated fees by $50,000 for SWIFIA borrowers in question 13.

      EPA did receive comments that were beyond the scope of this ICR and did not result in changes to this supporting statement and the application materials. The comments were focused on:
 The allocation of annual appropriation
 Provisions to ensure timely expenditure of funds
 System for providing disbursements

      EPA appreciates these comments and will take this feedback into consideration as it continues to develop the SWIFIA program.

 9.	Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.

       No payments or gifts are provided to respondents.

10.	Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.

      EPA cannot offer an assurance of confidentiality to any applicant. The applicant is directed to state if any information submitted in its LOI, application, or any supplementary material may not be released by the Agency upon request from a member of the public or otherwise made publicly available. The applicant must identify the confidential business information and provide reasons why such information is confidential business information and should not be released, including particulars as to any competitive harm which would potentially result from the release of such information. The Agency will handle requests from the public for release of information under its standard Freedom of Information Act procedures.

11.	Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature.

      Questions of a sensitive nature are not found in this information collection.

12.		Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information.
      Based on respondent numbers, burden data from the WIFIA's 2017 and 2018 rounds of collecting LOIs and applications, and consultations with borrowers, EPA is estimating the burden below.

      LOI (Base Program)
                              LOI Burden per LOI
Function
Legal
Manager
Technical
Clerical
Read LOI guidelines

                                                                              1
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
Gather Information

                                                                             10
                                                                              3
Complete basic LOI form

                                                                              3
Complete narrative

                                                                             20

Review LOI
                                                                              9
                                                                             10

Compile LOI

                                                                              2
TOTAL
                                                                              9
                                                                             11
                                                                             31
                                                                              9

 Total number of unduplicated respondents: 55
 Frequency of response: one per respondent
 Annual hour burden per application: 60
 Total annual burden hours: 3,300

      LOI (SWIFIA Program)
                              LOI Burden per LOI
Function
Legal
Manager
Technical
Clerical
Read LOI guidelines

                                                                            0.5

Gather Information

                                                                              1
Complete basic LOI form

                                                                            0.5

Review LOI
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
                                                                           0.5

Compile LOI

                                                                           0.5

TOTAL
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
                                                                              2
                                                                              1

 Total number of unduplicated respondents: 5
 Frequency of response: one per respondent
 Annual hour burden per application: 5
 Total annual burden hours: 25

	Application for Borrowers (Base Program):
                      Application Burden per Application

Legal
Manager
Technical
Clerical
Read application guidelines

                                                                              1
                                                                              2
                                                                              1
Gather Information

                                                                             50
                                                                             10
Complete application form

                                                                              1
Complete narrative

                                                                            110

Review Application
                                                                              5
                                                                             15

Compile Application

                                                                              5
TOTAL
                                                                              5
                                                                             16
                                                                            162
                                                                             17

 Total number of unduplicated respondents: 35
 Frequency of response: one per respondent
 Annual hour burden per application: 200
 Total annual burden hours: 7,000

	Application for Borrowers (SWIFIA Program):
                      Application Burden per Application

Legal
Manager
Technical
Clerical
Read application guidelines
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
                                                                              1
Gather Information

                                                                             30
                                                                              5
Complete application form

                                                                              1
Complete narrative

                                                                             42

Review Application
                                                                              4
                                                                              4
                                                                             9

Compile Application

                                                                              2
TOTAL
                                                                              5
                                                                              5
                                                                             82
                                                                              8

 Total number of unduplicated respondents: 5
 Frequency of response: one per respondent
 Annual hour burden per application: 100
 Total annual burden hours: 500

13.		Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information.

      EPA estimates that the total annual cost burden to respondents will be $14,946,754.85. EPA used the following median hourly wages from the May 2017 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates United States (http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm) from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics to calculate the cost of the estimated burden hours:
 Lawyers= $57.33
 Management= $50.77
 Engineers= $41.73
 Office and Administrative Support= $18.21

      The tables below show the breakdown in these costs for the LOIs, Applications, and other Application Costs. The numbers in blue in the tables below add up to the total annual cost. This estimate includes the following:

      LOIs (Base Program)

      For the Base Program LOI, EPA estimates 3,300 annual burden hours and the annualized cost of those hours is $139,257.80. EPA estimates 495 legal hours (at $57.33/hour equal $28,378.35); 605 management hours (at $50.77/hour equal $30,715.85); 1,705 technical hours (at $41.73/hour equal $71,149.65); and 495 clerical hours (at $18.21/hour equal $9,013.95).

Number of Collections per year
Hours per Collection
Total Hours per Collection
Total Cost per year
55
60
3,300
$139,257.80

      LOIs (SWIFIA Program)

      For the SWIFIA LOI, EPA estimates 25 annual burden hours and the annualized cost of those hours is $1,048.85. EPA estimates 5 legal hours (at $57.33/hour equal $286.65); 5 management hours (at $50.77/hour equal $253.85); 10 technical hours (at $41.73/hour equal $417.30); and 5 clerical hours (at $18.21/hour equals $91.05).

Number of Collections per year
Hours per Collection
Total Hours per Collection
Total Cost per year
5
5
25
$1,048.85

      Applications (Base Program)

      For the Base Program application, EPA estimates 7,000 annual burden hours and the annualized cost of those hours is $285,908. EPA estimates 175 legal hours (at $57.33/hour equal $10,032.75); 560 management hours (at $50.77/hour equal $28,431.20); 5,670 technical hours (at $41.73/hour equal $236,609.10); and 595 clerical hours (at $18.21/hour equal $10,834.95).

Number of Collections per year
Hours per Collection
Total Hours per Collection
Total Cost per year
35
200
7,000
$285,908.00

      Applications (SWIFIA Program)

      For the SWIFIA application, EPA estimates 500 annual burden hours and the annualized cost of those hours is $31,048.30. EPA estimates 25 legal hours (at $57.33/hour equal $1,433.25); 25 management hours (at $50.77/hour equal $1,269.25); 410 technical hours (at $41.73/hour equal $17,109.30); and 40 clerical hours (at $18.21/hour equal $728.40).

Number of Collections per year
Hours per Collection
Total Hours per Collection
Total Cost per year
5
100
500
$20,540.20

      Application Costs  -  Other

      	In addition, applicants will be charged two fees: an application fee and a credit processing fee. An application fee will be due upon submission of the application. A credit processing fee will be due upon loan closing, to reimburse costs incurred by the EPA due to legal, financial, and other expert contractor help. For projects serving small communities (population of not more than 25,000 people), the application fee will be $25,000. For all other applicants, including all SWIFIA applicants, the application fee will be $100,000. The application fee is a down payment on the credit processing fee when they submit an application, so the amount a small vs. large borrower pays differs in terms of what they pay in the up-front application cost, but EPA estimates the total costs of the application fee and the credit processing fee to be the same for all borrowers in the base program. Due to the nature of this credit processing fee, the amount is expected to vary between applicants. However, EPA estimates these costs for WIFIA base program applicants based on the FY 2017 borrowers as approximately $275,000 per applicant, a portion of which may be waived at the discretion of the EPA. For SWIFIA applicants, EPA estimates these costs to be lower since applicants will either accept EPA's standard terms or EPA will adopt the applicant's existing indenture. The total credit processing fees for SWIFIA would be $225,000. The total for 40 borrowers is $10,750,000, estimating 3 small community borrowers and 32 large community borrowers (at $275,000/borrower), and 5 SWIFIA borrowers (at $225,000/borrower).

      By statute, applicants to the base WIFIA program are required to submit a preliminary rating letter at the time of application and two (2) final rating letters at the time of closing that indicate that the senior obligation of the project has an investment grade rating. The cost of these rating letters varies based on the size and complexity of the project. Based on bond rating agency estimates and industry research, EPA estimates that the final rating letters will cost approximately $50,000 per letter and that the initial preliminary rating letter is included in the cost of one of the final letters. The total cost for 35 applicants (3 small community borrowers and 32 large community borrowers) is $3,500,000. Applicants to the SWIFIA program are required to submit a preliminary rating letter at the time of application and one (1) final rating letter at the time of closing that indicate that the senior obligation of the project has an investment grade rating. These rating letters must be from a bond rating agency identified by the Securities and Exchange Commission as a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization. The total cost for 5 applicants will be $250,000.

Large Community
Cost
# of Applications

Application Fee + Credit Processing Fee
 $275,000
                                                                             32
 $8,800,000
Two Rating Letters
 $100,000
                                                                             32
 $3,200,000
Annual Total per borrower
$375,000
 Annual Total
 $12,000,000

Small Community
Cost
# of Applications

Application Fee + Credit Processing Fee
 $275,000
                                                                              3
 $825,000
Two Rating Letters
 $100,000
                                                                              3
 $300,000
Annual Total per borrower
$375,000
 Annual Total
 $1,125,000

SWIFIA
Cost
# of Applications

Application Fee + Credit Processing Fee
 $225,000
                                                                              5
 $1,125,000
One Rating Letter
 $50,000
                                                                              5
 $250,000
Annual Total per borrower
$275,000
 Annual Total
 $1,375,000

14.	Provide estimates of annualized cost to the federal government.
	The estimated cost to the Federal government of this request for letters of interest and applications is $3,512,217.76. This cost reflects three components:

 EPA follows an evaluation process to review each LOI and application and to determine which projects will receive WIFIA funding. This process includes technical, financial, and management review of the letters of interest. Then, additional technical, financial, and management review of the applications. EPA estimates that this process will take 65% of the 26 FTEs' time employed by WIFIA.

      The estimated average annual cost for EPA personnel is $129,869 based on the General Schedule (GS) 14, Step 05 level from the 2018 GS salary table. The annual cost was then multiplied by the standard government benefits multiplication factor of 1.6 to calculate an estimated annual pay including benefits per FTE of $207,790.40. Therefore, the estimated annualized cost for the evaluation team is $3,511,657.76.

 EPA will hire legal, financial, and other expert contractor support for credit processing. These costs are estimated to be $275,000 per Base Program application and $225,000 per SWIFIA application. They are expected to be reimbursed in full by the applicants. The net estimated annualized cost to the Federal Government for credit processing is $0.

 EPA will print application materials. EPA does not expect to need any special equipment or support, other than printing. As noted above in item 12, EPA expects 60 letters of interest and 40 applications. If each LOI is 25 pages and each application is 50 pages, as requested in the solicitation, EPA may need to print as many as 3,500 pages for staff involved in the evaluation process. EPA estimates up to 8 staff may need materials which adds up to a total of 28,000 pages of printing. EPA's printing costs are approximately 2 cents per page, which adds up to a total printing cost of $560.

       Explain the reason for any program changes or adjustments reported in items 13 or 14 of the OMB form 83-1.

      There is an increase of 9,325 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase is due to EPA receiving more Letters of Interest and applications than it originally estimated during program inception.

      For the respondent burden in item 13, the annual cost increased compared to the previous submission of OMB form 83-1. Since program inception, EPA received more LOIs and applications than it originally estimated. EPA estimated the program would receive 20 LOIs and 5 applications. This was based on the amount of budget authority initially authorized for WIFIA. However, in 2017, the program received 43 LOIs and invited 12 prospective borrowers to apply. In 2018, the program received 62 LOIs and invited 39 prospective borrowers to apply. In addition, EPA is including the newly authorized State Revolving Fund WIFIA (SWIFIA) program as part of this ICR renewal. EPA estimates that WIFIA will receive 5 LOIs and 5 applications through SWIFIA.

      For the cost to the federal government, EPA's annual cost increased for the same reason as for item 13. It received more LOIs and applications then initially anticipated. Due to the large number of LOIs and applications, EPA has since hired more WIFIA staff to meet the burden of these reviews. Due to the nature of the work, the majority of WIFIA staff are legal, financial and technical experts with salaries that are high on the GS scale. This also increases the cost.

       For collections of information whose results will be published, outline plans for tabulation, and publication.

      The letters of interest and applications collected for the WIFIA program will not be published. EPA will maintain a publicly available list of projects that have submitted letters of interest and applications to the WIFIA program. The current lists are available at https://www.epa.gov/wifia/wifia-financing-requests.

17.	If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons that display would be inappropriate.

      The Agency plans to display the expiration date for OMB approval of the information collection on all instruments.

18.	Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in item 19, "certification for paperwork reduction act submissions," of OMB form 83-1.

      The Agency is able to certify compliance with all provisions under Item 19 of OMB Form 83-I."


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 47 (Monday, March 11, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8701-8702]
[FR Doc No: 2019-04331]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP19-100-000]

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Request Under
Blanket Authorization

    Take notice that on February 28, 2019, Tennessee Gas Pipeline
Company, L.L.C. (Tennessee), 1001 Louisiana Street, Houston, Texas
77002, filed in the above referenced docket a prior notice request
pursuant to sections 157.205 and 157.211(a)(2) of the Commission's
regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and its blanket certificate
issued in Docket No. CP82-413-000 for authorization to construct and
operate a new delivery point to serve the Hanscom Air Force Base
(Hanscom) in Middlesex County, Massachusetts. Tennessee has already
installed a three-inch-diameter hot tap assembly pursuant to the
authority granted in Docket No. CP14-483-000. Once Hanscom completes
the associated meter station on its property, Tennessee proposes to
install electronic gas measurement equipment, a flow computer, power
communications equipment, and measurement appurtenances, all located at
the meter station site. Tennessee states that the facilities will be
able to delivery up to 9.5 million cubic feet of natural gas per day at
an estimated cost of approximately $65,000, all as more fully set forth
in the request which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection.
    The filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website web 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 at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed Ben J.
Carranza, Director--Regulatory, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C.,
1001 Louisiana Street, Houston, Texas 77002, by telephone at (713) 420-
5535, or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 60 days after
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to
intervene or notice

of intervention and pursuant to section 157.205 of the regulations
under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the request. If no protest
is filed within the time allowed therefore, the proposed activity shall
be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for
filing a protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30
days after the allowed time for filing a protest, the instant request
shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to
section 7 of the NGA.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's
public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of
Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and
state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary
reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations
within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's EA.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list and will be
notified of any meetings associated with the Commission's environmental
review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve
copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party
commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other
parties or issued by the Commission and will not have the right to seek
court review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at
http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 3 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426.

    Dated: March 5, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-04331 Filed 3-8-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 94 (Monday, May 18, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23197-23198]
[FR Doc No: E9-11528]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0333]

Delaware River and Bay Oil Spill Advisory Committee; Meeting

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Delaware River and Bay Oil Spill Advisory Committee

(DRBOSAC) will meet in Philadelphia, PA to discuss various issues to
improve oil spill prevention and response strategies for the Delaware
River and Bay. This meeting will be open to the public.

DATES: The Committee will meet on Wednesday, June 17, 2009, from 10
a.m. to 1 p.m. This meeting may close early if all business is
finished. Requests to make oral presentations should reach the Coast
Guard on or before June 8, 2009. Written material, and requests to have
a copy of your material distributed to each member of the committee,
should reach the Coast Guard on or before June 10, 2009.

ADDRESSES: The Committee will meet at Coast Guard Sector Delaware Bay,
1 Washington Ave., Philadelphia, PA 19147. Send written material and
requests to make oral presentations to Gerald Conrad, Liaison to the
Designated Federal Officer (DFO) of the DRBOSAC, at the address above.
This notice and any documents identified in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section as being available in the docket may be viewed
online, at http://www.regulations.gov, using docket number USCG-2008-
0333.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gerald Conrad, Liaison to the DFO of
the DRBOSAC, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting is given under the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (Pub. L. 92-463).

Agenda of the Meeting

    The agenda for the June 17 meeting will be as follows:
    (1) Opening comments.
    (2) Introductions.
    (3) Administrative announcements.
    (4) Pre-approved presentations from the public.
    (5) Debriefs from each DRBOSAC Sub-committee.
    (6) Public comments.
    (7) Future Committee business.
    (8) Closing.

More information and detail on the meeting will be available at the
committee Web site, located at https://homeport.uscg.mil/drbosac.
Additional detail may be added to the agenda up to June 10, 2009.

Procedural

    This meeting is open to the public. All persons entering the
building will have to present identification and may be subject to
screening. Please note that the meeting may close early if all business
is finished.
    The public will be able to make oral presentations during the
meeting when given the opportunity to do so. Members of the public may
seek pre-approval for their oral presentations by contacting the Coast
Guard no later than June 8, 2009. The public may file written
statements with the committee; written material should reach the Coast
Guard no later than June 10, 2009. If you would like a copy of your
material distributed to each member of the committee in advance of the
meeting, please submit 35 copies to the Liaison to the DFO no later
than June 10, 2009, and indicate that the material is to be distributed
to committee members in advance of the June 17 meeting.
    Please register your attendance with the Liaison to the DFO no
later than June 10, 2009.

Information on Services for Individuals With Disabilities

    For information on facilities, or services for individuals with
disabilities, or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact
the Liaison to the DFO as soon as possible.

    Dated: 5 May 2009.
David L. Scott,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Sector Delaware Bay, Designated
Federal Officer.
[FR Doc. E9-11528 Filed 5-15-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 163 (Tuesday, August 23, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57534-57535]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20011]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0523; FRL-9950-83-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Shipbuilding Antifoulant Coatings

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve, as a revision to the Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP),
a submittal by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management dated
July 17, 2015. The submittal contains a new volatile organic compound
limit for antifoulant coatings used in shipbuilding and ship repair
facilities located in Clark, Floyd, Lake, and Porter counties. The
submittal also includes a demonstration that this revision satisfies
the anti-backsliding provisions of the Clean Air Act. The submittal
additionally removes obsolete dates and clarifies a citation.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 22, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2015-0523 at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing

system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the ``For Further Information Contact'' section. For the
full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

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

    Dated: August 5, 2016.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2016-20011 Filed 8-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 42 (Friday, March 2, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 9072]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04311]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Fourteenth RTCA SC-230 Airborne Weather Detection Systems Plenary

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

ACTION: Fourteenth RTCA SC-230 Airborne Weather Detection Systems
Plenary.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of Fourteenth RTCA SC-230 Airborne Weather Detection Systems
Plenary.

DATES: The meeting will be held April 4-5, 2018 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES:  The meeting will be held at: RTCA Headquarters, 1150 18th
Street NW, Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Karan Hofmann at [email protected] or
202-330-0680, or The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW, Suite 910,
Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax at (202)
833-9434, or website at http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a) (2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of the Fourteenth RTCA SC-230 Airborne
Weather Detection Systems Plenary. The agenda will include the
following:

Wednesday, April 4, 2018--9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

1. Welcome and Administrative Remarks
2. Introductions
3. Agenda Review
4. Meeting Minutes Review and Approval of Last Plenary
5. Review and Work Resolution of Final Review and Comment (FRAC) Inputs
for DO-220A Change 1 and DO-213A Change 1

Thursday, April 5, 2018--9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

1. Continue Review and Work Resolution of FRAC Inputs for DO-220A
Change 1 and DO-213A Change 1
2. Decision to Approve Release of DO-220A Change 1 and DO-213A Change 1
for Presentation to the Program Management Committee
3. Discuss and Approve Revision to Terms of Reference
4. Action Item Review
5. Any Other Business
6. Date and Place of Next Meeting
7. Adjourn

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 27, 2018.
Michelle Swearingen,
Systems and Equipment Standards Branch, AIR-6B0, Policy and Innovation
Division, AIR-600, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2018-04311 Filed 3-1-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 127 (Monday, July 2, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39236-39238]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16137]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL- 6560-50-P 9659-9; Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2012-0512]

Nanomaterial Case Study: A Comparison of Multiwalled Carbon
Nanotubes and Decabromodiphenyl Ether Flame-Retardant Coatings Applied
to Upholstery Textiles

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Public Comment Period and Public Information Exchange
Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing a 60-day public comment period for the
external review draft document titled, ``Nanomaterial Case Study: A
Comparison of Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes and Decabromodiphenyl Ether
Flame-Retardant Coatings Applied to Upholstery Textiles'' (EPA/600/R-
12/043A). The draft document is being issued by the National Center for
Environmental Assessment (NCEA) within EPA's Office of Research and
Development (ORD). It does not draw conclusions regarding potential
environmental risks or hazards of multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT);
rather, it aims to identify what is known and unknown about MWCNT to
support future assessment efforts. EPA is releasing this draft document
for the purposes of public comment and peer review. This draft document
is not final as described in EPA's information quality guidelines, and
it does not represent and should not be construed to represent Agency
policy or views. EPA will consider public comments it receives in
accordance with this notice when finalizing the draft document. EPA is
also announcing a Public Information Exchange Meeting to: (1) Receive
comments and questions on the draft ``Nanomaterial Case Study: A
Comparison of Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes and Decabromodiphenyl Ether
Flame-Retardant Coatings Applied to Upholstery Textiles;'' and (2) to
provide information on the draft EPA nanomaterial case study and the
workshop process that the draft document will be used in for
identifying and prioritizing research gaps that could support future
assessment and risk management efforts for MWCNT. This workshop process
will be conducted independently by RTI International, a contractor to
EPA.

DATES: The public comment period begins, July 2, 2012, and ends August
31, 2012. Comments must be received on or before August 31, 2012.
    The Public Information Exchange Meeting on the draft EPA document
``Nanomaterial Case Study: A Comparison of Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes
and Decabromodiphenyl Ether Flame-Retardant Coatings Applied to
Upholstery Textiles'' will be held on October 29, 2012, beginning at
8:30 a.m. and ending at 10:30 a.m. Eastern Standard Time.

ADDRESSES: The draft EPA document ``Nanomaterial Case Study: A
Comparison of Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes and Decabromodiphenyl Ether
Flame-Retardant Coatings Applied to Upholstery Textiles'' is available
primarily via the Internet on the NCEA home page under Recent Additions
and the Data and Publications menus at http://www.epa.gov/ncea. A
limited number of paper copies are available. For copies, contact
Marieka Boyd by phone<PHONE_NUMBER>), fax<PHONE_NUMBER>), or email
(boyd.marieka@epa.gov). If you are requesting a paper copy, please
provide your name, your mailing address, and the document title,

``Nanomaterial Case Study: A Comparison of Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes
and Decabromodiphenyl Ether Flame-Retardant Coatings Applied to
Upholstery Textiles.''
    Comments may be submitted electronically via http://www.regulations.gov, by mail, by facsimile, or by hand courier. Please
follow the detailed instructions provided in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this notice.
    The Public Information Exchange Meeting on the draft EPA document
``Nanomaterial Case Study: A Comparison of Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes
and Decabromodiphenyl Ether Flame-Retardant Coatings Applied to
Upholstery Textiles'' will be held at the EPA facility in Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina. The RTI Workshop will be held in the
same location, following the Public Information Exchange Meeting. To
attend the Public Information Exchange Meeting or observe the RTI
workshop, register no later than October 15, 2012, by calling Ms.
Kristin Smith at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by sending an email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Space is limited, and reservations will be
accepted on a first-come, first-served basis. Please indicate whether
you are interested in attending the EPA Public Information Exchange
Meeting or observing the RTI International Workshop or both.
    Information on Services for Individuals with Disabilities: EPA
welcomes public attendance at the Public Information Exchange Meeting
and will make every effort to accommodate persons with disabilities.
For information on access or services for individuals with
disabilities, contact: Kristin Smith at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Additional Information: For information on the docket or the public
comment period, contact the Office of Environmental Information Docket;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For technical information on the draft document, contact
Dr. Christy Powers, National Center for Environmental Assessment; (MD
B243-01), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
NC 27711; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Information About the Project/Document

    The draft document will be used in a workshop process that engages
experts with diverse technical backgrounds (e.g., toxicology, polymer
science, environmental fate, and transport) and sector perspectives
(e.g., academia, industry, government, and nongovernment
organizations). Experts will use the draft case study document to
identify and prioritize research gaps that could support future
assessment and risk management efforts for MWCNT using a structured
decision process. This workshop process will be conducted by RTI
International, an EPA contractor, and will utilize web-based tools to
gather expert input prior to culminating in a face-to-face workshop
convened by RTI International.
    The Public Information Exchange Meeting announced above will
precede the workshop convened by RTI International. Following the
conclusion of the Information Exchange Meeting, RTI International, a
contractor to EPA, will conduct a separate meeting, the ``Nanomaterial
Case Study Workshop Process: Identifying and Prioritizing Research for
Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes,'' in the same location. This workshop
will be conducted with a set of invited expert participants selected by
RTI International and utilize a structured decision science process
similar to the process used in previous workshops (e.g., http://www.epa.gov/osp/bosc/pdf/nano1005summ.pdf). The RTI workshop will use
the draft EPA document ``Nanomaterial Case Study: A Comparison of
Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes and Decabromodiphenyl Ether Flame-
Retardant Coatings Applied to Upholstery Textiles'' [External Review
Draft] (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/
R-12/043A, 2012, (http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=244011) as a starting point for identifying and
prioritizing possible research directions related to multiwalled carbon
nanotubes. Although funded by EPA, the RTI workshop process is being
conducted independently of EPA to comply with provisions of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. 2 [http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/laws/fed-advisory-committee]). The RTI workshop will
be open to public observers.
    This draft document and structured workshop process is funded by
EPA but is independently conducted by RTI International and follows
previous efforts on engineered nanoscale materials (nanomaterials).
Nanomaterials have often been described as having at least one
dimension between 1 and 100 nanometers and frequently possessing
unusual, if not unique, properties that arise from their small size.
Like all technological developments, nanomaterials offer the potential
for both benefits and risks. The assessment of such risks and benefits
requires information, but given the emergent state of nanotechnology,
much remains to be learned about the characteristics and effects of
nanomaterials before such assessments can be accomplished.
    In its 2007 Nanotechnology White Paper (2007, p. 89), EPA included
the following recommendations regarding the risk assessment of
nanomaterials: (1) Develop case studies based on publicly available
information on one or several intentionally produced nanomaterials, and
from such case studies identify information gaps to help map areas of
research that would support the risk assessment process; and (2) hold a
series of workshops involving a substantial number of experts from
several disciplines to assist in this process. In keeping with these
recommendations, the National Center for Environmental Assessment
(NCEA) in EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) prepared the
Nanomaterial Case Studies: Nanoscale Titanium Dioxide in Water
Treatment and in Topical Sunscreen [Final] (U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-09/057F, 2010, http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=230972), released in
November 2010, and the Nanomaterial Case Study: Nanoscale Silver in
Disinfectant Spray [External Review Draft] (U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-10/081, 2012).
    The two draft documents each supported a workshop: ``Nanomaterial
Case Studies Workshop: Developing a Comprehensive Environmental
Assessment Research Strategy for Nanoscale Titanium Dioxide'' on
September 29-30, 2009, in Durham, North Carolina, and ``Nanomaterial
Case Studies Workshop: Developing a Comprehensive Environmental
Assessment Research Strategy for Nanoscale Silver'' on January 4-7,
2011, in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. A summary of the
workshops may be found at: http://www.epa.gov/osp/bosc/pdf/nano1005summ.pdf and http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=226723 for nanoscale titanium dioxide and
nanoscale silver, respectively. The summary documents provide
information on the design and conduct of the workshops, noting that the
Nanomaterial Case Studies Workshop for nanoscale titanium dioxide was
held under the auspices of the EPA Board of Scientific Counselors
(BOSC), an advisory committee of independent scientists and engineers
established by

EPA to provide advice, information, and recommendations concerning
practices and programs of ORD, including ORD's research planning
process, in accordance with provisions of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act and related regulations. In August 2010, the BOSC
provided comments on the case studies workshop (http://www.epa.gov/osp/bosc/pdf/nano1008rpt.pdf).
    The case study documents are structured by the comprehensive
environmental assessment (CEA) framework, to systematically organize
information on the product life cycle, environmental fate, exposure-
dose, and impacts in humans, ecological receptors, and the environment.
As noted above, CEA also includes a process component involving
decision science methods, and this aspect of CEA was used in prior
workshops to identify and prioritize research or information needed to
assess nanoscale titanium dioxide and nanoscale silver, respectively.
    The nanomaterial case studies are intended to be used in the
development and refinement of long-term research planning efforts for
potential human health, ecological, and environmental risks. Such a
comprehensive strategy is expected to develop in an evolutionary
process reflecting adjustments and modifications as additional
nanomaterials are considered and new information becomes available. To
that end, the current case study on multiwalled carbon nanotubes
(MWCNT) builds on previous efforts by incorporating a comparative
perspective with conventional flame-retardant, decabromodiphenyl ether.
This comparison is included to provide a relatively more robust data
base that may help identify key data gaps for MWCNT related to future
assessment and risk management efforts. It further provides a
foundation for future efforts to identify risk[hyphen]related tradeoffs
between a traditional material, such as decaBDE and a
nano[hyphen]enabled product.

II. How To Submit Technical Comments to the Docket at
www.regulations.gov

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2012-
0512 by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket
(Mail Code: 28221T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. The phone number is 202-
566-1752.
     Hand Delivery: The OEI Docket is located in the EPA
Headquarters Docket Center, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. 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 Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Such deliveries are only accepted during
the docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should
be made for deliveries of boxed information. If you provide comments by
mail or hand delivery, please submit three copies of the comments. For
attachments, provide an index, number pages consecutively with the
comments, and submit an unbound original and three copies.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-
2012-0512. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the
specified comment period. Comments received after the closing date will
be marked ``late,'' and may only be considered if time permits. It is
EPA's policy to include all comments it receives in the public docket
without change and to make the comments available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless a comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information through
www.regulations.gov or email that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an email comment directly to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the
EPA Docket Center home page at www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: Documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other materials,
such as copyrighted material, are publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the OEI Docket in the EPA
Headquarters Docket Center.

    Dated: June 25, 2012.
Darrell A. Winner,
Acting Director, National Center for Environmental Assessment.
[FR Doc. 2012-16137 Filed 6-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P