[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 192 (Thursday, October 5, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 69008-69011]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22085]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2023-1056; Project Identifier MCAI-2023-00179-T;
Amendment 39-22563; AD 2023-20-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and A350-1041 airplanes. This AD is
prompted by reports that excessively deep spot faces on the front
engine mounting bolt holes on the wing pylon were detected on the
production line. This AD requires a one-time inspection for clash
(interference) of the three front engine mounting bolt holes on both
the left and right wing pylons, and, depending on findings,
accomplishment of applicable corrective actions, as specified in a
European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is incorporated
by reference. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective November 9, 2023.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of November 9,
2023.

ADDRESSES:
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-1056; 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 final rule, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The
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.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For material incorporated by reference in this AD, contact
EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221
8999 000; email [email protected]; website easa.europa.eu. You may
find this material on the EASA website ad.easa.europa.eu.
     You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th Street,
Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD docket at
regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1056.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dat Le, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA,
1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-
7317; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Airbus SAS
Model A350-941 and A350-1041 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
Federal Register on June 1, 2023 (88 FR 35785). The NPRM was prompted
by AD 2023-0026, dated January 30, 2023, issued by EASA (EASA AD 2023-
0026) (also referred to as the MCAI), which is the Technical Agent for
the Member States of the European Union. The MCAI states excessively
deep spot faces have been detected on the production line on rib 1 at
the level of the front engine mount bolting. This could cause possible
integration issues between the pylon and the front engine mount, which
could lead to interference damage. This condition, if not detected and
corrected, could lead to a reduced fatigue life, which could adversely
affect the structural integrity of the airplane.
    In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require a one-time inspection for
clash (interference) of the three front engine mounting bolt holes on
both the left and right wing pylons, and, depending on findings,
accomplishment of applicable corrective actions, as specified in EASA
AD 2023-0026. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products.
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-1056.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received comments from Air Line Pilots Association,
International (ALPA) who supported the NPRM without change.
    The FAA received additional comments from Delta Air Lines (Delta).
The following presents the comments received on the NPRM and the FAA's
response to each comment.

Request for Another Exception to the MCAI

    Delta requested an exception to require only accomplishment of
Airbus Service Bulletin A350-71-P011, Revision 01, dated December 20,
2022 (ASB A350-71-P011) and Airbus Service Bulletin A350-71-P015, dated
December 20, 2022 (ASB A350-71-P015), ``in accordance'' with steps in
those bulletins. Otherwise, the ``in accordance with'' in Airbus
Service Bulletin A350-54-P006, Rev 01, dated December 20, 2022 (ASB
A350-54-P006), and Airbus Service Bulletin A350-54-P008, dated December
20, 2022 (ASB A350-54-P008) might otherwise be inferred as requiring
the entire service bulletin, ASB A350-71-P011 or ASB A350-71-P015, as
mandatory.
    Delta explained that ASB A350-54-P006 and ASB A350-54-P008 required
to be accomplished by EASA AD 2023-0026, use the ``in accordance with''
language to call for implementation of ASB A350-71-P011, and ASB A350-
71-P015 and states that ASB A350-71-P011 and ASB A350-71-P015 do not
have the paragraph specifying ``Required for compliance'' (RC) actions.
Delta states this might infer the entire ASB A350-71-P011 or ASB A350-
71-P015 must be accomplished for AD compliance.
    The FAA agrees to clarify. The FAA AD refers to EASA AD 2023-0026,
which requires following the mandatory (required for compliance)
actions in ASB A350-54-P006 and ASB A350-54-P008. These two service
bulletins include RC actions that specify that specific actions must be
done in

accordance with ASB A350-71-P011 and ASB A350-71-P015. Additionally,
ASB A350-71-P011 and ASB A350-71-P015, specify in a note within the
accomplishment instructions that ``access and close-up instructions,
not comprising return to service tests'' can be omitted or amended to
add flexibility to their maintenance operations as long as the
technical intent is met. Therefore, the required actions in ASB A350-
71-P011 and ASB A350-71-P015 are those that are not specified as access
or close-up instructions, and are the actions specifically described by
ASB A350-54-P006 and ASB A350-54-P008. As an example, ASB A350-54-P006
specifies to ``Disassemble the retention bracket assy and the 3 pylon
bolt assemblies during engine removal'', for which the technical intent
of the ASB A350-54-P006 is to comply with the instructions in ASB A350-
71-P011 that include these actions.

Request for Clarification if the Test Section in the Bulletins Are
Required

    Delta requested clarification on whether the Test Section in ASB
A350-54-P006, ASB A350-54-P008, ASB A350-71-P011, and ASB A350-71-P015
are required. The instructions do not use ``in accordance with'' or
``refer to'' language, leaving confusion.
    The ``Test'' sections of ASB A350-54-P006 and ASB A350-54-P008
require the accomplishment of tests given in other topics which are
referenced in ASB A350-71-P011 or ASB A350-71-P015. The ``Test''
sections of ASB A350-71-P011 and ASB A350-71-P015 state ``Do the test
procedure as specified in the installation of the demountable power
plant (FIN 4000EM1 or 2), refer to MP A350-A-71-00-51-00ZZZ-720Z-A.''
    The FAA provides the following clarification. The tests specified
in ASB A350-54-P006 and ASB A350-54-P008 are required. The Required for
Compliance section of the Accomplishment Instructions states that
paragraph 3.E. are RC. Any mandatory language, such as accomplishment
of tests, in 3.E. is therefore required. As described by the commenter,
since the Test sections of ASB A350-54-P006 and ASB A350-54-P008
specify that the accomplishment of Tests given in other topics are also
required, therefore the Test sections in ASB A350-71-P011 and ASB A350-
71-P015 are also required. The FAA has not changed this AD as a result
of this comment.

Conclusion

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the
comments received, and determined that air safety requires adopting
this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address
the unsafe condition on this product. Except for minor editorial
changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM. None of the
changes will increase the economic burden on any operator.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2023-0026 specifies procedures for a one-time inspection
for clash of the three pylon bolt holes at rib 1 (forward engine
attachment on pylon), on both the left and right wing pylons, and
applicable corrective actions. Corrective actions include installing
the post-mod retention bracket assembly; accomplishing a detailed
inspection and a high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection or a
penetrant inspection on rib 1 for damage (cracks, scratches, or erosion
of the protective coating); measuring the spot face depth and pylon
thickness and obtaining and following instructions if incorrect spot
face depth or pylon thickness at the spot face are found; and repair.
This material is reasonably available because the interested parties
have access to it through their normal course of business or by the
means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 31 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
56 work-hours x $85 per hour = $4,760........................              $0           $4,760         $147,560
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition action that would be required based on the results of any
required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need this on-condition action:

                 Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 work-hours x $85 per hour = $850...             $10             $860
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the cost
estimates for the on-condition repairs specified in this AD.

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.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or

develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2023-20-04 Airbus SAS: Amendment 39-22563; Docket No. FAA-2023-1056;
Project Identifier MCAI-2023-00179-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective November 9, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus SAS Model A350-941 and A350-1041
airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified in European
Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2023-0026, dated January 30,
2023 (EASA AD 2023-0026).

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 54, Nacelles/
pylons.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports that excessively deep spot faces
on the front engine mounting bolt holes on the wing pylon were
detected on the production line. The FAA is issuing this AD to
address potential integration issues between the pylon and the front
engine mount, which could lead to interference damage. The unsafe
condition, if not addressed, could result in reduced fatigue life,
which could adversely affect the structural integrity of the
airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2023-0026.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2023-0026

    (1) Where EASA AD 2023-0026 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2023-0026 refers to
``discrepancies,'' for this AD discrepancies are any clash
(interference) between the lockplate support and rib 1 or between
the pylon bolt and the engine mount; damage (cracks, scratches, or
erosion of the protective coating); and incorrect spot face depth or
pylon thickness at the spot face.
    (3) Where paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2023-0026 specifies to
``contact Airbus for approved instructions for corrective action and
accomplish those instructions accordingly'' if discrepancies are
detected; for this AD if any cracking is detected, the cracking must
be repaired before further flight using a method approved by the
Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus
SAS's EASA Design Organization Approval (DOA). If approved by the
DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized signature.
    (4) This AD does not adopt the ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD
2023-0026.
    (5) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2023-
0026 specifies to report inspection results or findings, this AD
requires submitting information only if damage (cracks) or incorrect
spot face depth or pylon thickness at the spot face are found during
any inspection required by EASA AD 2023-0026. Operators are required
to submit certain information as part of obtaining any corrective
actions approved by Airbus SAS's EASA DOA.

(i) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Validation 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 responsible Flight Standards Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the International
Validation Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified
in paragraph (j) 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 responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Validation Branch, FAA; or EASA; or Airbus SAS's EASA DOA. If
approved by the DOA, the approval must include the DOA-authorized
signature.
    (3) Required for Compliance (RC): Except as required by
paragraph (i)(2) of this AD, if any service information contains
procedures or tests that are identified as RC, those procedures and
tests must be done to comply with this AD; any procedures or tests
that are not identified as RC are recommended. Those procedures and
tests that are not identified as RC may be deviated from using
accepted methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or
inspection program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided
the procedures and tests identified as RC can be done and the
airplane can be put back in an airworthy condition. Any
substitutions or changes to procedures or tests identified as RC
require approval of an AMOC.

(j) Additional Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Dat Le, Aviation
Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2023-0026,
dated January 30, 2023.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2023-0026, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
[email protected]; website easa.europa.eu. You may find this EASA
AD on the EASA website ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this material at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th
Street, Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
[email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on September 29, 2023.
Victor Wicklund,
Deputy Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-22085 Filed 10-4-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 156 (Tuesday, August 15, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55445-55451]
[FR Doc No: 2023-17469]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP23-513-000]

Port Arthur Pipeline, LLC; Notice of Scoping Period Requesting
Comments on Environmental Issues for the Proposed Louisiana Connector
Pipeline Amendment

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental document that will discuss
the environmental impacts of the Louisiana Connector Pipeline
Amendment, which involves 38 modifications to the previously authorized
pipeline alignment, construction footprint, and installation methods
for the Louisiana Connector Project, which was approved by the
Commission on April 18, 2019, in docket no. CP18-7-000. Please note
that the previously approved Louisiana Connector Project is not under
re-consideration in this amendment. The Commission will use the
environmental document referred to in this notice in its decision-
making process to determine whether the 38 modifications proposed in
the amendment are 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 regarding the project. As part of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) review process, the Commission takes into account
concerns the public may have about proposals and the environmental
impacts that could result from its action whenever it considers the
issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. This
gathering of public input is referred to as ``scoping.'' The main goal
of the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the environmental
document on the important environmental issues. Additional information
about the

Commission's NEPA process is described below in the NEPA Process and
Environmental Document section of this notice.
    By this notice, the Commission requests public comments on the
scope of issues to address in the environmental document. To ensure
that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please submit your
comments so that the Commission receives them in Washington, DC on or
before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on September 8, 2023. Comments may be
submitted in written form. Further details on how to submit comments
are provided in the Public Participation section of this notice.
    Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects,
reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental
impacts specifically related to the modifications proposed in the
amendment, which are detailed further below. Your input will help the
Commission staff determine what issues they need to evaluate in the
environmental document. Commission staff will consider all written
comments during the preparation of the environmental document.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives should notify their constituents of this proposed
amendment and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a Port Arthur
Pipeline, LLC (PAPL) representative may contact you about the
acquisition of an easement to construct, operate, and maintain the
proposed amended facilities. The company would seek to negotiate a
mutually acceptable easement agreement. You are not required to enter
into an agreement. However, if the Commission approves the project
amendment, the Natural Gas Act conveys the right of eminent domain to
the company. Therefore, if you and the company do not reach an easement
agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation proceedings
in court. In such instances, compensation would be determined by a
judge in accordance with state law. The Commission does not
subsequently grant, exercise, or oversee the exercise of that eminent
domain authority. The courts have exclusive authority to handle eminent
domain cases; the Commission has no jurisdiction over these matters.
    PAPL provided landowners with a fact sheet prepared by the FERC
entitled ``An Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I
Need To Know?'' which addresses typically asked questions, including
the use of eminent domain and how to participate in the Commission's
proceedings. This fact sheet along with other landowner topics of
interest are available for viewing on the FERC website (www.ferc.gov)
under the Natural Gas, Landowner Topics link.

Public Participation

    There are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the
Commission. Please carefully follow these instructions so that your
comments are properly recorded. The Commission encourages electronic
filing of comments and has staff available to assist you at (866) 208-
3676 or [email protected].
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature, which is located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov)
under the link to FERC Online. Using eComment is an easy method for
submitting brief, text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov)
under the link to FERC Online. With eFiling, you can provide comments
in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on ``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing you
are making; a comment on a particular project is considered a ``Comment
on a Filing''; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the Commission. Be sure to reference the project docket number (CP23-
513-000) on your letter. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service
must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC
20426. Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, MD 20852.
    Additionally, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which makes it easy to stay informed of all issuances and
submittals regarding the dockets/projects to which you subscribe. These
instant email notifications are the fastest way to receive notification
and provide a link to the document files which can reduce the amount of
time you spend researching proceedings. Go to https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/overview to register for eSubscription.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

Summary of the Proposed Amendment

    The proposed amended facilities are specific to 38 locations in
Jefferson County, Texas and Cameron, Calcasieu, Beauregard, and Allen
Parishes, Louisiana (between milepost 0 in Jefferson County, Texas and
milepost 82.5 south of Reeves in Allen Parish, Louisiana), as detailed
below:
     modifications to pipeline routes, construction methods,
horizontal directional drill (HDD) entry points, and additional
temporary workspaces to accommodate landowner requests, to reduce
environmental impacts, to avoid newly identified non-PAPL pipelines, to
avoid new structures, or to allow for safer construction access;
     shifting of pipeline easements to allow the permanent
easements to abut other existing permanent easements;
     addition and modification of access roads for geotechnical
boring access and/or to allow better and safer access to the HDD drill
pad for construction and HDD inspection;
     modification of equipment and material storage areas and
staging areas to utilize areas that were recently and permanently
impacted by other parties;
     modification to water approaches to use existing boat
ramp/dock improvements;
     relocation of mainline valves to reduce the amount of
permanent right-of-way needed, to facilitate operations and
maintenance, to provide for safer access via road, and to allow access
to power and communications to comply with new and anticipated U.S.
Department of Transportation/Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration requirements;
     modification of three waterbody crossings methodologies
from open cut to an HDD as requested by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers;
     combine, in two locations, multiple HDDs into a single HDD
which would result in avoiding an open-cut crossing and eliminating an
HDD; and

     modification of HDD alignments to avoid conflicts with
potential future deeper canal depths.
    The general location of the project amendment facilities is shown
in appendix 1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The appendices referenced in this notice will not appear in
the Federal Register. Copies of the appendices were sent to all
those receiving this notice in the mail and are available at
www.ferc.gov using the link called ``eLibrary.'' For instructions on
connecting to eLibrary, refer to the last page of this notice. At
this time, the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's
Public Reference Room. For assistance, contact FERC at
[email protected] or call toll free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY
(202) 502-8659.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the amended facilities would result in a net
increase of approximately 20.9 acres of land as compared to what was
previously authorized (total of 2,827.9 acres of land, as compared to
2,807.0 acres). This net increase would be attributable to the
temporary workspace increases in open water and industrial/commercial
areas (31.3 acres and 17.6 acres, respectively), while being reduced in
residential and natural areas (i.e., wetlands, forests, and other open
land) by 28.1 acres. Wetland impacts would be reduced by 10.9 acres.
    Operation of the modified facilities would permanently impact 20.8
acres less land (750.2 acres, as compared to 771.0 acres), most of
which is accounted for in the removal of permanent access roads.

NEPA Process and the Environmental Document

    Any environmental document issued by the Commission will discuss
impacts that could occur as a result of the construction and operation
of the 38 modifications proposed in the amendment under the relevant
general resource areas:
     geology and soils;
     water resources and wetlands;
     vegetation and wildlife;
     threatened and endangered species;
     cultural resources;
     land use;
     environmental justice;
     air quality and noise; and
     reliability and safety.
    Commission staff will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the
proposed amendment or portions of the amendment and make
recommendations on how to lessen or avoid impacts on the various
resource areas. Your comments will help Commission staff identify and
focus on the issues that might have an effect on the human environment
and potentially eliminate others from further study and discussion in
the environmental document.
    Following this scoping period, Commission staff will determine
whether to prepare an environmental assessment (EA) or an environmental
impact statement (EIS). The EA or the EIS will present Commission
staff's independent analysis of the issues. If Commission staff
prepares an EA, a Notice of Schedule for the Preparation of an
Environmental Assessment will be issued. The EA may be issued for an
allotted public comment period. The Commission would consider timely
comments on the EA before making its decision regarding the proposed
project amendment. If Commission staff prepares an EIS, a Notice of
Intent to Prepare an EIS/Notice of Schedule will be issued, which will
open up an additional comment period. Staff will then prepare a draft
EIS which will be issued for public comment. Commission staff will
consider all timely comments received during the comment period on the
draft EIS and revise the document, as necessary, before issuing a final
EIS. Any EA or draft and final EIS will be available in electronic
format in the public record through eLibrary \2\ and the Commission's
natural gas environmental documents web page (https://www.ferc.gov/industries-data/natural-gas/environment/environmental-documents). If
eSubscribed, you will receive instant email notification when the
environmental document is issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to the
last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With this notice, the Commission is asking agencies with
jurisdiction by law and/or special expertise with respect to the
environmental issues of this project amendment to formally cooperate in
the preparation of the environmental document.\3\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Council on Environmental Quality regulations addressing
cooperating agency responsibilities are at Title 40, Code of Federal
Regulations, Section 1501.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultation Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, the Commission is using this notice to initiate
consultation with the Louisiana State Historic Preservation Office, and
to solicit their views and those of other government agencies,
interested Indian tribes, and the public on the project's potential
effects on historic properties.\4\ The environmental document for this
project amendment will document findings on the impacts on historic
properties and summarize the status of consultations under section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 800. Those
regulations define historic properties as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all landowners affected by the 38 proposed modifications (as
defined in the Commission's regulations) who are potential right-of-way
grantors, whose property may be used temporarily for project purposes,
or who own homes within certain distances of aboveground facilities,
and anyone who submits comments on the project amendment and includes a
mailing address with their comments. Commission staff will update the
environmental mailing list as the analysis proceeds to ensure that
Commission notices related to this environmental review are sent to all
individuals, organizations, and government entities interested in and/
or potentially affected by the proposed amendment.
    If you need to make changes to your name/address, or if you would
like to remove your name from the mailing list, please complete one of
the following steps:
    (1) Send an email to [email protected] stating your
request. You must include the docket number CP23-513-000 in your
request. If you are requesting a change to your address, please be sure
to include your name and the correct address. If you are requesting to
delete your address from the mailing list, please include your name and
address as it appeared on this notice. This email address is unable to
accept comments.
    OR
    (2) Return the attached ``Mailing List Update Form'' (appendix 2).

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project amendment is available
from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or
on the FERC

website at www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Click on the eLibrary
link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the docket number in the
``Docket Number'' field. Be sure you have selected an appropriate date
range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected] or<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY, contact (202)
502-8659. The eLibrary link also provides access to the texts of all
formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and
rulemakings.
    Any public sessions or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at https://www.ferc.gov/news-events/events along with other related information.

    Dated: August 9, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15AU23.000

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15AU23.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15AU23.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15AU23.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15AU23.004

[FR Doc. 2023-17469 Filed 8-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-C


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 244 (Thursday, December 19, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 76781-76784]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30097]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0859; Airspace Docket No. 13-AWA-4]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Modification of Class B Airspace; Salt Lake City, UT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend the description of Area C and
Area O of the Salt Lake City Class B airspace area by raising the floor
of a small portion of Class B airspace between the Salt Lake City Class
B surface area and the Hill Air Force Base (AFB) Class D airspace area.
This action proposes to raise the Class B airspace floor in the
northeast corner of Area C from 6,000 feet mean seal level (MSL) to
7,500 feet MSL, and redefine the new boundary segment using the power
lines underlying the area. This would benefit and enhance non-
participating VFR aircraft operations being flown north and south
through the Salt Lake Valley over Interstate 15.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 3, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2013-
0859 and Airspace Docket No. 13-AWA-4 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy and
Regulations Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2013-0859 and Airspace Docket No. 13-AWA-4) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Nos. FAA-2013-0859 and Airspace Docket No. 13-AWA-4.'' The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified closing date
for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date
for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/recently_published/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Central Service Center, Operations
Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 2601 Meacham Blvd. Fort
Worth, TX 76137.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

Background

    On August 17, 2012, the FAA published a final rule modifying the
Salt Lake City, UT Class B airspace area (77 FR 49712) with an
effective date of October 18, 2012. Subsequent to this effective date,
the FAA determined that a portion of Area C, with its 6,000 foot MSL
floor, was extended farther northeast (northeast corner of Area C) than
necessary based on operational experience with the new Salt Lake City
Class B airspace configuration. The portion of Class B airspace in the
proposal overlies a short segment of a heavily used VFR flyway that
follows Interstate 15 (I-15) between the Salt Lake City Class B surface
area and Hill AFB Class D airspace area. However, VFR pilots not in
contact with air traffic control use I-15 as a convenient and easily
viewed landmark for VFR aircraft flying north and south through the
Salt Lake Valley. The 6,000 foot MSL Class B airspace floor in the
northeast corner of Area C causes problems for VFR aircraft
transitioning this area. VFR pilots following I-15 have found it
difficult to avoid the Class B airspace due to the 6,000 foot MSL floor
and the lack of good landmarks in the area. In addition, air traffic
controllers routing VFR aircraft through the area over I-15 are
required to either obtain and issue a Class B airspace clearance or
vector the VFR aircraft north of the 6,000 foot MSL Class B airspace
floor until clear of the area.
    Raising the floor of Class B airspace from 6,000 feet MSL to 7,500
feet MSL in the northeast corner of Area C, and using the power lines
located west of I-15 as a visual reference to identify the boundary
where Class B airspace with a 6,000 foot MSL floor ends, would overcome
the issues associated with Area C that are being experienced by VFR
pilots and air traffic controllers. Additionally, raising the floor of
Class B airspace in this area would significantly benefit and enhance
VFR aircraft operations in the area without compromising containment of
large turbine-powered aircraft conducting instrument procedures within
Class B airspace.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to modify the Salt Lake City Class
B airspace area. This action proposes to raise the floor of a portion
of Class B airspace in the northeast corner of Area C from 6,000 feet
MSL to 7,500 feet MSL. The portion of Class B airspace being raised
lies northeast of the power lines running northwest and southeast under
Area C and would be incorporated into the description of Area O, which
has a 7,500 foot MSL Class B airspace floor. The power lines under Area
C would be used to visually define the new shared boundary between Area
C and Area O in that area. These proposed modifications would enhance
the safety and flow of VFR aircraft transitioning north and south in
the Salt Lake Valley by following I-15, while continuing to support
containment of large turbine-powered aircraft flying instrument
procedures within Class B airspace.
    The FAA is not proposing any modification actions to the Salt Lake
City Class B airspace Areas A, B, and D through N. The proposed
modifications to the Salt Lake City Class B airspace Area C and Area O
subareas are outlined below.
    Area C. Area C would include the airspace extending upward from
6,000 feet MSL to 12,000 feet MSL. This action would redefine the
northeast boundary of Area C by a line drawn west of and parallel to
the power lines that run northwest and southeast between the TCH
006[deg] radial 9.5-mile DME at lat. 41[deg]00'28'' N., long.
111[deg]57'36'' W. and the TCH 016[deg] radial 8.1-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]58'48'' N., long. 111[deg]55'58'' W. The floor of Class B
airspace located immediately northeast of the power lines just
described would be raised from 6,000 feet MSL to 7,500 feet MSL and
incorporated into the adjacent Area O. The remainder of Area C would be
unchanged.
    Area O. Area O would include the airspace extending upward from
7,500 feet MSL to 12,000 feet MSL. The boundary of the area would be
realigned to match the segment of the power lines that run northwest
and southeast between the TCH 006[deg] radial 9.5-mile DME at lat.
41[deg]00'28'' N., long. 111[deg]57'36'' W. and the TCH 016[deg] radial
8.1-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]58'48'' N., long. 111[deg]55'58'' W. used
to redefine the

northeast boundary of Area C. The portion of Class B airspace
incorporated into Area O would raise the floor of Class B airspace in
that area from 6,000 feet MSL to 7,500 feet MSL. The remainder of Area
O would be unchanged.
    All radials listed in this proposed Salt Lake City Class B airspace
area description modification are stated in degrees relative to True
North. All geographic coordinates are stated in degrees, minutes, and
seconds based on North American Datum 83.
    Implementation of the proposed modification to the Salt Lake City
Class B airspace area would continue to ensure containment of large
turbine-powered aircraft within Class B airspace as required by FAA
directive. Additionally, this proposed action would allow VFR aircraft
to transition east/west, north of the Salt Lake City Class B surface
area, and north/south, to and from Salt Lake City airport, using I-15
as an easily identifiable visual landmark outside of Class B airspace
below 7,500 feet MSL. This proposed modification would enhance the
safety and efficient management of aircraft operations in the Salt Lake
City, UT, terminal area.
    Class B airspace areas are published in paragraph 3000 of FAA Order
7400.9X, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 7,
2013, and effective September 15, 2013, which is incorporated by
reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class B airspace area listed in this
document would be published subsequently in the Order.

Regulatory Evaluation Summary

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct
that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon
a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation
justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub.
L. 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of
regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act
(Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In
developing U.S. standards, the Trade Act requires agencies to consider
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of
the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that
include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State,
local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with
base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's
analysis of the economic impacts of this proposed rule.
    Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations.
If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed or final rule
does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits that a statement
to that effect and the basis for it to be included in the preamble if a
full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits is not prepared.
Such a determination has been made for this proposed rule. The
reasoning for this determination follows:
    This proposed rule has the following benefits.
    This proposed rule would improve the flow of air traffic, enhance
safety, and reduce the potential for midair collision in the Salt Lake
City Class B airspace.
    Implementation of the proposed modification to the Salt Lake City
Class B airspace area would continue to ensure containment of large
turbine-powered aircraft within Class B airspace as required by FAA
directive. Additionally, this proposed action would allow VFR aircraft
to transition east/west, north of the Salt Lake City Class B surface
area, and north/south, to and from Salt Lake City Airport, using I-15
as an easily identifiable visual landmark outside of Class B airspace
below 7,500 feet MSL. This proposed modification would enhance the
safety and efficient management of aircraft operations in the Salt Lake
City, UT terminal area.
    The FAA believes that this proposed rule would result in minimal
costs.
    The FAA has, therefore, determined that this proposed rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, and is not ``significant'' as defined in DOT's
Regulatory Policies and Procedures.

Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation.'' To achieve this principle, agencies are
required to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to
explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals
are given serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide-range of small
entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
    However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the
agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required. The certification must include a statement providing the
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be
clear.
    The FAA believes the proposed rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as the
economic impact is expected to be minimal.
    Therefore as the acting FAA Administrator, I certify that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.

International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards.
    The FAA has assessed the potential effect of this proposed rule and
determined that it would enhance safety and would not be considered an
unnecessary obstacle to trade.

Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $143.1 million in lieu of $100
million.
    This proposed rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore, the
requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

Environmental Review

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9X, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15,
2013, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 3000 Subpart B--Class B Airspace.

* * * * *

ANM UT B Salt Lake City, UT [Amended]

Salt Lake City International Airport (Primary Airport)
    (Lat. 40[deg]47'18'' N., long. 111[deg]58'40'' W.)
Wasatch VORTAC (TCH)
    (Lat. 40[deg]51'01'' N., long. 111[deg]58'55'' W.)
Hill AFB (HIF)
    (Lat. 41[deg]07'26'' N., long. 111[deg]58'23'' W.)
    Boundaries.
    By removing the current descriptions of Area C and Area O, and
adding in its place:
    Area C. That airspace extending upward from 6,000 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning at the TCH 316[deg] radial 11.6-mile DME at lat.
40[deg]59'21'' N., long. 112[deg]09'33'' W.; thence east to a point
west of the power lines at the TCH 006[deg] radial 9.5-mile DME at
lat. 41[deg]00'28'' N., long. 111[deg]57'36'' W.; thence southeast
to a point west of the power lines at the TCH 016[deg] radial 8.1-
mile DME at lat. 40[deg]58'48'' N., long. 111[deg]55'58'' W.; thence
south to the TCH 020[deg] radial 6.6-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]57'13''
N., long. 111[deg]55'56'' W.; thence west to a point southeast of
Seagull Point on Antelope Island at the TCH 304[deg] radial 9.3-mile
DME at lat. 40[deg]56'13'' N., long. 112[deg]09'05'' W.; thence
north to the point of beginning.
    Area O. That airspace extending upward from 7,500 feet MSL to
and including 12,000 feet MSL, within an area bounded by a line
beginning at the intersection of U.S. Highway 89 and a 4.3-mile
radius from Hill AFB at the TCH 014[deg] radial 13.6-mile DME at
lat. 41[deg]04'11'' N., long. 111[deg]54'39'' W.; thence clockwise
along the 4.3-mile radius from Hill AFB to 1700 South St. at the TCH
347[deg] radial 14.7-mile DME at lat. 41[deg]05'20'' N., long.
112[deg]03'21'' W.; thence west along W. 1700 South St. to the TCH
329[deg] radial 16.8-mile DME at lat. 41[deg]05'22'' N., long.
112[deg]10'20'' W.; thence south to the TCH 316[deg] radial 11.6-
mile DME at lat. 40[deg]59'21'' N., long. 112[deg]09'33'' W.; thence
east to a point west of the power lines at the TCH 006[deg] radial
9.5-mile DME at lat. 41[deg]00'28'' N., long. 111[deg]57'36'' W.;
thence southeast to a point west of the power lines at the TCH
016[deg] radial 8.1-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]58'48'' N., long.
111[deg]55'58'' W.; thence south to the TCH 020[deg] radial 6.6-mile
DME at lat. 40[deg]57'13'' N., long. 111[deg]55'56'' W.; thence
south to the intersection of Redwood Rd. and W. 500 South St. at the
TCH 049[deg] radial 3.1-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]53'02'' N., long.
111[deg]55'48'' W.; thence south to Center St. at the TCH 102[deg]
radial 2.3-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]50'32'' N., long. 111[deg]55'57''
W.; thence east along Center St. to I-15 at the TCH 099[deg] radial
3-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]50'32'' N., long. 111[deg]54'56'' W.;
thence north along I-15 to U.S. Highway 89 at the TCH 024[deg]
radial 9-mile DME at lat. 40[deg]59'14'' N., long. 111[deg]54'05''
W.; thence north along U.S. Highway 89 to the point of beginning.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 12, 2013.
Donna Warren,
Acting Manager, Airspace Policy and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2013-30097 Filed 12-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P