[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 3, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40-44]
[FR Doc No: 2016-31380]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Parts 204, 206, and 207

[Docket ID: FEMA-2016-0034]
RIN 1660-AA89

Update of FEMA's Public Assistance and Fire Management Assistance
Grant Regulations To Reflect the Terminology of Uniform Administrative
Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is amending its
Public Assistance and Fire Management Assistance Grant regulations to
update the terms it uses to describe grantees and subgrantees, to
reflect the terminology used in the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Uniform Guidance on Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles,
and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards.

DATES: Effective January 3, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Logan, Director, Public
Assistance Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street
SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance
Act, as amended (Stafford Act), Title 42 of the United States Code
(U.S.C.) 5121 et seq., authorizes the President to provide Federal
assistance when the magnitude of an incident or threatened incident
exceeds the affected State, Territorial, Indian Tribal, and local
government capabilities to respond or recover. FEMA provides assistance
to State, Territorial, Indian Tribal, and local governments and certain
types of private nonprofit (PNP) organizations via its Public
Assistance program. Through the Public Assistance program, FEMA
provides supplemental Federal disaster grant assistance for debris
removal, emergency protective measures, and the restoration of
disaster-damaged, publicly owned facilities and the facilities of
certain PNP organizations. The Public Assistance program also
encourages protection of these damaged facilities from future events by
providing

assistance for hazard mitigation measures. FEMA regulations for the
Public Assistance program are found at 44 CFR part 206. The regulations
at 44 CFR part 207, ``Management Costs,'' also apply to Public
Assistance awards.
    Fire Management Assistance is available to States, local and tribal
governments, for the mitigation, management, and control of fires on
publicly or privately owned forests or grasslands, which threaten such
destruction as would constitute a major disaster. FEMA Regional
Administrators (RAs) have the authority to issue Fire Management
Assistance Grant (FMAG) declarations for wildfires that threaten such
destruction that would constitute a major disaster. The regulations
governing the FMAG program are found at 44 CFR part 204.
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) establishes Uniform
Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements
for Federal Awards, found at 2 CFR part 200. These regulations apply to
awards under FEMA's Public Assistance and FMAG programs.

II. The Adoption of Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards

    On December 26, 2013, OMB published final government-wide guidance
entitled, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and
Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. 78 FR 78589. The Uniform
Guidance set standard requirements for Federal awards across the entire
Federal government and consolidated the language from OMB circulars
into one set of guidance that is located at 2 CFR part 200. In December
2014, OMB and Federal award-making agencies published a joint interim
final rule that implemented the Uniform Guidance. 79 FR 75871. DHS
adopted the Uniform Guidance at 2 CFR part 3002.
    In the interim final rule, FEMA amended 44 CFR via a technical
amendment that removed part 13 (FEMA's grant administration
regulations) and replaced all references to part 13 with references to
2 CFR parts 200 and 3002. FEMA replaced general references to part 13
with the general citations to 2 CFR parts 200 and 3002. To the extent
applicable, FEMA also replaced references to specific portions of part
13 with the corresponding pinpoint citations to 2 CFR parts 200 and
3002.
    FEMA adopted the interim final rule as final, with one change, on
October 2, 2015. 80 FR 59549. The change was a reinsertion of a
provision that was inadvertently removed by the interim final rule.

III. Revisions to 44 CFR Parts 204 and 206

    In this final rule, FEMA is updating its Public Assistance and FMAG
program regulations to reflect two terms used in 2 CFR part 200. The
Uniform Guidance uses the terms ``recipient'' and ``subrecipient'' when
referring to entities that receive Federal awards, whereas FEMA's
regulations use the terms ``grantee'' and ``subgrantee'' when referring
to entities that receive Federal awards under FEMA Public Assistance
and FMAG grant programs. To improve consistency with the Uniform
Guidance, FEMA is replacing the term ``grantee'' with ``recipient'' and
the term ``subgrantee'' with ``subrecipient'' throughout 44 CFR part
204 and 44 CFR part 206, subparts G, H, and I. Although grantees and
subgrantees, as defined in 44 CFR parts 204 and 206, are considered to
be recipients and subrecipients under 2 CFR part 200, FEMA intends to
use comparable terms to avoid confusion and provide consistency between
applicable regulations and Public Assistance policy.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ FEMA has updated its Public Assistance program policy to
reflect terms used in 2 CFR part 200. Public Assistance Program and
Policy Guide, FP 104-009-2 (January 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FEMA is not making substantive revisions to the current definitions
for the terms ``grantee'' and ``subgrantee.'' The Uniform Guidance
provides that ``[d]ifferent definitions [of the terms ``recipient'' and
``subrecipient,'' among other terms] may be found in Federal statutes
or regulations that apply more specifically to particular programs or
activities.'' 2 CFR 200.1. As such, although FEMA is replacing the
terms ``grantee'' and ``subgrantee'' with the terms ``recipient'' and
``subrecipient,'' respectively, FEMA is continuing to use the
definitions for these terms at 44 CFR part 204 and 44 CFR part 206,
subpart G, which apply more specifically to the Public Assistance and
FMAG programs.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Because FEMA is replacing the terms in existing definitions,
we are redesignating the paragraphs in Sec.  206.201 to maintain
alphabetical order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FEMA is also replacing remaining references to 44 CFR part 13 with
references to 2 CFR part 200. This is a technical change to correct
citations that were not updated by the December 19, 2014 joint interim
final rule. Finally, FEMA is correcting two typographical errors to
citations in 44 CFR part 206. In Sec.  206.222(b), the reference to
Sec.  205.221(e) will be corrected to Sec.  206.221(e). In Sec.
206.226(f)(2), the reference to paragraph (d)(1) will be corrected to
paragraph (f)(1).

IV. Revisions to 44 CFR Part 207

    The regulations at 44 CFR part 207, ``Management Costs,'' apply to
Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) awards. To
ensure consistency with the terminology used in both Public Assistance
and HMGP regulations, FEMA is revising the definitions of ``Grantee''
and ``Subgrantee'' in 44 CFR part 207 to make clear that in part 207 as
well, the terms ``Grantee'' and ``Recipient'' are interchangeable, as
are the terms ``Subgrantee'' and ``Subrecipient.'' This is a non-
substantive change to make it clear that the terms are interchangeable
and that 44 CFR part 207 applies to Public Assistance and HMGP awards
regardless of the terminology used in the program regulations.
    This rule makes technical and nomenclature changes intended to
reduce confusion and encourage the use of consistent terminology in the
administration of Public Assistance and FMAG awards.

V. Regulatory Analyses

A. Administrative Procedure Act

    FEMA did not undertake notice and comment for this regulation
because it is making purely technical and non-substantive terminology
changes. The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) provides that an agency
may dispense with notice and comment rulemaking procedures when an
agency, for good cause, finds those procedures are impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. 5 U.S.C. 553(b). FEMA
finds that such procedures are unnecessary for this rule because this
rule makes technical updates and non-substantive terminology changes to
improve consistency with 2 CFR part 200, and does not change any
regulatory requirements. For instance, this rule will not change the
requirements to request assistance, the eligibility requirements to
receive assistance, the amount of assistance available, or the appeals
process under the FMAG or Public Assistance programs. The changes made
by this rule do not change or confer any substantive rights, benefits
or obligations. For the same reasons, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), FEMA
finds that it has good cause to make this final rule effective
immediately.

B. Executive Order 12866, as Amended, Regulatory Planning and Review;
Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, the rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget. As this rule involves non-substantive changes that will not
change FEMA's administration of the subject regulations, FEMA expects
that the rule will not impose any costs on the public.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, (5 U.S.C. 601-
612), agencies must consider the impact of their rulemakings on ``small
entities'' (small businesses, small organizations and local
governments) when issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking. As FEMA is
not issuing a proposed rule for this action, the Regulatory Flexibility
Act does not apply.

List of Subjects

44 CFR Part 204

    Administrative practice and procedure, Fire prevention, Grant
programs, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

44 CFR Part 206

    Administrative practice and procedure, Coastal zone, Community
facilities, Disaster assistance, Fire prevention, Grant programs-
housing and community development, Housing, Insurance,
Intergovernmental relations, Loan programs-housing and community
development, Natural resources, Penalties, and Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

44 CFR Part 207

    Administrative practice and procedure, Disaster assistance, Grant
programs, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, and under the
authorities listed below, the Federal Emergency Management Agency
amends 44 CFR Chapter I as follows:

PART 204--FIRE MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE GRANT PROGRAM

0
1. The authority citation for part 204 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 5121 through 5207; 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation 9001.1.

Sec.  204.3  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  204.3--
0
a. Revise the defined term ``Grantee'' to read ``Recipient'' and place
the definition in appropriate alphabetical order;
0
b. Revise the defined term ``Subgrantee'' to read ``Subrecipient'' and
place the definition in appropriate alphabetical order;
0
c. Remove the word ``Grantee'' wherever it appears and add in its place
the word ``recipient'';
0
d. Remove the word ``grantee'' wherever it appears and add in its place
the word ``recipient''; and
0
e. Remove the word ``subgrantee'' wherever it appears and add in its
place the word ``subrecipient''.

Sec.  204.25  [Amended]

0
3. In Sec.  204.25(a), remove the word ``Grantee'' and add in its place
the word ``recipient''.

Sec.  204.41  [Amended]

0
4. In Sec.  204.41(a) introductory text, remove the word ``Grantee''
and add in its place the word ``recipient''.

Sec.  204.42  [Amended]

0
5. In Sec.  204.42(a)(3), remove the word ``Grantees'' and add in its
place the word ``Recipients'' and remove the word ``subgantees'' and
add in its place the word ``subrecipients''.

Sec.  204.43  [Amended]

0
6. In Sec.  206.43(c), remove the word ``subgrantee's'' and add in its
place the word ``subrecipient's''.

Sec.  204.51  [Amended]

0
7. In Sec.  204.51, remove the word ``Grantee'' wherever it appears and
add in its place the word ``recipient''.

Sec.  204.52  [Amended]

0
8. In Sec.  204.52, remove the word ``Grantee'' wherever it appears and
add in its place the word ``recipient''.

Sec.  204.53  [Amended]

0
9. In Sec.  204.53(a), remove the word ``Grantee'' and add in its place
the word ``recipient''.

Sec.  204.54  [Amended]

0
10. In Sec.  204.54--
0
a. In the introductory text, remove the word ``subgrantee'' and add in
its place the word ``subrecipient'' and remove the word ``grantee'' and
add in its place the word ``recipient'';
0
b. In paragraph (a), remove the words ``grantee-related'' and add in
their place the words ``recipient-related'', remove the word
``grantee'' wherever it appears and add in its place the word
``recipient'', and remove the word ``subgrantee'' wherever it appears
and add in its place the word ``subrecipient'';
0
c. In paragraph (c)(2), remove the word ``subgrantee'' and add in its
place the word ``subrecipient'' and in paragraph (c)(3), remove the
word ``grantee'' wherever it appears and add in its place the word
``recipient''; and
0
 d. In paragraph (d), remove the word ``grantee'' and add in its place
the word ``recipient''.

Sec.  204.62  [Amended]

0
11. In Sec.  204.62(c), remove the word ``Grantee'' and add in its
place the word ``recipient'' and remove the word ``subgrantee'' and add
in its place the word ``subrecipient''.

Sec.  204.63  [Amended]

0
12. In Sec.  204.63(b), remove the word ``Grantee's'' and add in its
place the word ``recipient's''.

Sec.  204.64  [Amended]

0
13. In Sec.  204.64(b)(1), remove the word ``Grantee'' and add in its
place the word ``recipient'' and remove the word ``subgrantees'' and
add in its place the word ``subrecipients''.

PART 206--FEDERAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE

0
14. The authority citation for part 206 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 through 5207; Homeland Security Act
of 2002, 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation 9001.1; sec. 1105, Pub. L. 113-2, 127 Stat. 43 (42 U.S.C.
5189a note).

Sec.  206.120  [Amended]

0
15. In Sec.  206.120(d)(4)(iv)(A), remove the words ``44 CFR 13.41''
and add in their place the words ``2 CFR 200.327''.

Sec.  206.200  [Amended]

0
16. In Sec.  206.200(b), remove the word ``Grantee'' wherever it
appears and add in its place the word ``recipient'', remove the word
``subgrantee'' and add in its place the word ``subrecipient'';

and remove the word ``subgrantees'' wherever it appears and add in its
place the word ``subrecipients''.

0
17. In Sec.  206.201--
0
a. In paragraph (a), remove the word ``Grantee'' and add in its place
the word ``recipient'';
0
b. Remove paragraph (e);
0
c. Redesignate paragraph (e) as paragraph (m); and redesignate
paragraphs (f) through (m) as paragraphs (e) through (l);
0
d. In newly redesignated paragraph (l), remove the word ``Grantee'' and
add in its place the word ``recipient'';
0
e. Add new paragraph (m);
0
f. In paragraph (n), remove the word ``grantee'' and add in its place
the word ``recipient''; and remove the word ``subgrantee'' and add in
its place the word ``subrecipient''; and
0
g. Revise the paragraph (o) heading to read ``Subrecipient'' and in
paragraph (o), remove the word ``grantee'' and add in its place the
word ``recipient''.
    The addition reads as follows:

Sec.  206.201  Definitions used in this part.

* * * * *
    (m) Recipient. Recipient means the government to which a grant is
awarded, and which is accountable for the use of the funds provided.
The recipient is the entire legal entity even if only a particular
component of the entity is designated in the grant award document.
Generally, except as provided in Sec.  206.202(f), the State for which
the emergency or major disaster is declared is the recipient. However,
an Indian Tribal government may choose to be a recipient, or it may act
as a subrecipient under the State. If an Indian Tribal government is
the recipient, it will assume the responsibilities of the ``recipient''
or ``State'' as described in this part with respect to administration
of the Public Assistance program.
* * * * *

Sec.  206.202  [Amended]

0
18. In Sec.  206.202--
0
a. In paragraph (a), remove the word ``Grantee'' wherever it appears
and add in its place the word ``recipient'';
0
b. In the paragraph (b) heading, remove the word ``Grantee'' and add in
its place the word ``Recipient'';
0
c. In paragraph (b)(1), remove the word ``subgrantees'' and add in its
place the word ``subrecipients'';
0
d. In paragraphs (c) and (e), remove the word ``Grantee'' wherever it
appears and add in its place the word ``recipient'';
0
e. In paragraph (f)(1)(i), remove the word ``grantee'' and add in its
place the word ``recipient''; and
0
f. In paragraph (f)(2), remove the word ``Grantees'' and add in its
place the word ``recipient'', remove the word ``grantee's'' and add in
its place the word ``recipient's'', and remove the word
``subgrantee's'' and add in its place the word ``subrecipient's''.

Sec.  206.203  [Amended]

0
19. In Sec.  206.203--
0
a. In paragraph (c)(1), remove the word ``grantee'' and add in its
place the word ``recipient'';
0
b. In paragraph (d)(1), remove the word ``subgrantee'' and add in its
place the word ``subrecipient''; and remove the word ``Grantee's'' and
add in its place the word ``recipient's'';
0
c. In paragraph (d)(2) introductory text, remove the word
``subgrantee'' and add in its place the word ``subrecipient'' and
remove the word ``Grantee'' and add in its place the word
``recipient''; and
0
d. In paragraph (d)(2)(v), remove the word ``Grantee'' wherever it
appears and add in its place the word ``recipient''.

Sec.  206.204  [Amended]

0
20. In Sec.  206.204--
0
a. In paragraph (c)(2), remove the word ``Grantee'' wherever it appears
and add in its place the word ``recipient'' and in paragraph
(c)(2)(ii), remove the word ``subgrantee'' and add in its place the
word ``subrecipient'';
0
b. In paragraph (d) introductory text, remove the word ``Grantee's''
and add in its place the word ``recipient's'' and remove the word
``Grantee'' and add in its place the word ``recipient'';
0
c. In paragraph (d)(2), remove the word ``Grantee'' and add in its
place the word ``recipient''; and remove the word ``grantee'' and add
in its place the word ``recipient'';
0
d. In paragraph (e), remove the word ``subgrantee'' wherever it appears
and add in its place the word ``subrecipient'';
0
e. In paragraph (e)(2), remove the word ``Grantee'' wherever it appears
and add in its place the word ``recipient''; and
0
f. In paragraph (f), remove the word ``Grantee'' wherever it appears
and add in its place the word ``recipient'' and remove the word
``grantee'' and add in its place the word ``recipient''.

Sec.  206.205  [Amended]

0
21. In Sec.  206.205(a) and (b), remove the word ``Grantee'' wherever
it appears and add in its place the word ``recipient''; and remove the
word ``subgrantee'' wherever it appears and add in its place the word
``subrecipient''.

Sec.  206.206  [Amended]

0
22. In Sec.  206.206--
0
a. In the introductory text and paragraphs (a), (c), and (d), remove
the word ``grantee'' wherever it appears, and add in its place the word
``recipient''; and remove the word ``subgrantee'' wherever it appears
and add in its place the word ``subrecipient''; and
0
b. In paragraph (a), remove the words ``grantee-related'' and add in
their place the words ``recipient-related''.

Sec.  206.207  [Amended]

0
23. In Sec.  206.207--
0
a. In paragraph (b)(1)(iii)(D), remove the word ``subgrantees'' and add
in its place the word ``subrecipients'';
0
b. In paragraph (b)(1)(iii)(F), remove the word ``grantee'' and add in
its place the word ``recipient'';
0
c. In paragraph (b)(1)(iii)(K), remove the word ``grantee'' and add in
its place the word ``recipient'', remove the word ``subgrantees'' and
add in its place the word ``subrecipients'', and remove the word
``subgrantee'' and add in its place the word ``subrecipient'';
0
d. In paragraph (b)(2), remove the word ``Grantee'' and add in its
place the word ``recipient'';
0
e. In paragraph (b)(3) and (4), remove the word ``Grantee'' wherever it
appears and add in its place the word ``recipient''; and
0
f. In paragraph (c)(1), remove the word ``grantees'' and add in its
place the word ``recipients'' and remove the word ``subgrantees'' and
add in its place the word ``subrecipients''.

Sec.  206.208  [Amended]

0
24. In Sec.  206.208, in paragraphs (a), (b) introductory text, and
(e)(1) and (2), remove the word ``Grantee'' wherever it appears and add
in its place the word ``recipient''.

Sec.  206.209  [Amended]

0
25. In Sec.  206.209--
0
a. In paragraph (b) introductory text, remove the word ``subgrantee''
and add in its place the word ``subrecipient'';
0
b. In paragraphs (e), (f), and (i)(2), remove the word ``Grantee''
wherever it appears and add in its place the word ``recipient''; and
0
c. In paragraph (e)(3), remove the word ``Grantee's'' and add in its
place the word ``recipient's''.

0
26. In Sec.  206.210--
0
a. In paragraph (a), remove the word ``subgrantee'' and add in its
place the word ``subrecipient'';
0
b. In paragraph (b), remove the definition of ``Grantee'' and add a
definition for ``Recipient'' in alphabetical order;

0
c. In paragraph (b), remove the word ``grantee'' wherever it appears
and add in its place the word ``recipient'';
0
d. In paragraphs (f), (g), (h)(1)(i) and (ii), (h)(2)(iii), and (h)(3),
remove the word ``grantee'' wherever it appears and add in its place
the word ``recipient'';
0
e. In the paragraph (h)(1) heading, remove the word ``Grantee'' and add
in its place the word ``Recipient''; and
0
f. In paragraph (h)(1)(i), remove the word ``grantee's'' and add in its
place the word ``recipient's''.
    The addition reads as follows:

Sec.  206.210  Dispute Resolution Pilot Program.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    Recipient is used throughout this regulation text and it refers to
the definition in FEMA's regulations at 44 CFR 206.201(m).
* * * * *

Sec.  206.222  [Amended]

0
27. In Sec.  206.222(b), remove the reference ``Sec.  205.221(e)'' and
add in their place the reference ``Sec.  206.221(e)''.

Sec.  206.226  [Amended]

0
28. In Sec.  206.226--
0
a. In paragraph (a)(2), remove the word ``grantees'' and add in its
place the word ``recipients'';
0
b. In paragraph (b), remove the word ``grantee'' and add in its place
the word ``recipient''; and
0
c. In paragraph (f)(2), remove the words ``paragraph (d)(1)'' and add,
in their place, the words ``paragraph (f)(1)''.

Sec.  206.228  [Amended]

0
29. In Sec.  206.228--
0
a. In the introductory text, remove the words ``44 CFR 13.22'' and add
in their place the words ``2 CFR 200, subpart E'' and remove the words
``44 CFR 13.4 and 13.6'' and add in their place the words ``2 CFR 200,
subpart E and 2 CFR 200.102''; and
0
b. In paragraphs (a)(2) introductory text and (a)(2)(ii), remove the
word ``grantee's'' wherever it appears and add in its place the word
``recipient's'' and remove the word ``subgrantee's'' wherever it
appears and add in its place the word ``subrecipient's''.

Sec.  206.250  [Amended]

0
30. In Sec.  206.250(b), remove the word ``Grantee'' and add in its
place the word ``recipient''.

Sec.  206.252  [Amended]

0
31. In Sec.  206.252--
0
a. In paragraph (c), remove the word ``Grantee'' and add in its place
the word ``recipient'' and remove the word ``grantee'' and add in its
place the word ``recipient''; and
0
b. In paragraph (d), remove the word ``grantee'' and add in its place
the word ``recipient'' and remove the word ``subgrantee'' and add in
its place the word ``subrecipient''.

Sec.  206.253  [Amended]

0
32. In Sec.  206.253--
0
a. In paragraphs (a), (c), and (e), remove the word ``Grantee''
wherever it appears and add in its place the word ``recipient''; and
0
b. In paragraphs (b)(1) and (c), remove the word ``grantee'' wherever
it appears and add in its place the word ``recipient''.

PART 207--MANAGEMENT COSTS

0
33. The authority citation for part 207 continues to read as follows:

     Authority:  Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 through 5206; Reorganization Plan No.
3 of 1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; Homeland Security
Act of 2002, 6 U.S.C. 101; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979
Comp., p. 376; E.O. 12148, 44 FR 43239, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 412;
E.O. 13286, 68 FR 10619, 3 CFR, 2003 Comp., p. 166.

Sec.  207.2  [Amended]

0
34. In Sec.  207.2--
0
a. Revise the defined term ``Grantee'' to read ``Grantee
(alternatively, Recipient)''; and
0
b. Revise the defined term ``Subgrantee'' to read ``Subgrantee
(alternatively, Subrecipient)''.

    Dated: December 21, 2016.
W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2016-31380 Filed 12-30-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-66-P


CONS UlTl HG rcFF Economic Impacts of Implementing a Regional SO, Emissions Program in the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Region Prepared for: Western RegionalAir Partnership Market Trading Forum Prepared by: ICFConsulting January 2WO rCF CONSULTlNG Agenda m Overview of Analytic Framework and Inputs to REMI m Detailed Discussion of Economic Impacts 1 ICF CON I" f lN G Regional Economic Impact 8 Regional economic impacts were analyzed using REMl's Policy Insight Model.

AlO region, 53 sector version of REMl's model was acquired to simulate the regional economic impact of regional SO, reduction policies at the state level for the the nine GCVTC states and the single tribal region.

14t Key drivers to REMI were derived from the economic modeling using ICF's IPM.

2 L I COINS U LTlN CI ICF Key Inputs to REMI Key inputs to REMI derived from IPM are:

 Non fuel expenditures resulting from the policy Total Capital Investment Annual incremental cost  Changes in wholesale electricity prices  Changes in fuel production and consumption  Net revenue from permit allocations.

m All impacts from IPM were characterized by state, sector and year.

! cF Key Drivers: Non Fuel Expenditures Incremental Capital Investments 1t 4 Annualized Cost ( byState and Sector) Expenditures from Installation of Equipment ( scrubbers, new generation or retrofits)

* Capital expendituresare split between constructionand equipmentpurchases Regional Purchasetheficients ( RPC) in REMI determinesalocatjon ofexpenditures across regions  REMI allocates regional expendituresby sector and input mix.

. Secondary effects are on householdincome, wages, prices, . Net Change in annualized productioncosts = change in revenue+ changein annual capital and FOM+ Netfuel cost changes+ netpermit revenues  Electric generatorspass throughunrecoverable cost changes or excess revenuesto shareholders Share ownership national and distributed based on household income * Other sectors experiencedecreasedprofitability due to increased production cost > Sectors that compete regionally pass through costs via to producers and consumers 5 Sectors that compete nationallyexperience a change in market share 3 Annual Incremental Cost m Annual incremental costs, projected by IPM, denote the compliance cost of the policy and are incrementalto the base case.

1 Annual incremental cost consist of changes in capital investment and changes in variable and fixed operating cost.

R Annual incremental costs affect the regional economy in two main ways.

 Non electric industries that compete nationallyexperience a decrease in competitiveness, while non electricindustries that compete locally change their product price. Electricgenerators pass through unrecoverable cost changes or excess revenues to shareholders.

 Capital investments spur construction and increase equipment purchase.

Incremental Annual Cost in 2013 ( millions 1997$) Environ Command 8, State Minontv MTF EPA mental Control A2 10 25 32 62 37 CA 3  31  54  130  1 co ID  7  19 1  26 2  49 55 5  2 NM 5 15 19 38 1 NV  14  33  44  83 4 OR  9  9  9  9 4 UT 4 12 15 25 11 WY 11 28 40 75 102 Tribal 8 20 26 50  Total 11 9 I  16 21I 4 ICF CONSUL7IY6 lncremental Annual Cost in 2018 ( millions 1997$)

EnGron Command & State Minority MTF EPA mental Control CA 6  22  39  37  2 co 15 39 43 33 47 ID 1 I 1 1  NM NV 5  2 IO  12 3  a 5  3  6 OR 2 2 2  1 4 UT 1 16 20 21 12 WY 24 41 51 199 108 Tribal 3 9 I1 1 2 Az 5 25 41 68 40 ._

Total 60 121 145 274 210 CON5I) LTING Annual lncremental Cost ( Continued) Sources located in AZ, CO and WY bear most of the cost ( primarily capital investment costs) associated with the command & control scenario because a large share of the BART eligible sources are located in these states.

Sources located in CA realizes lower costs in 2013 and 2018 under the trading scenarios because of the lower level of repowering of existing oil/ gas steam units relative to the Baseline.

5 Annual Incremental Cost ( Continued) a Similarly, sources located in CO and WY realize lower costs in 2013 under the trading scenarios relative to the baseline because repowering ofexisting IC1boilers is postponed in anticipation ofthe policy in 2018.

ICF Trading Cases  CONSULrlNG Incremental Cost for GCVTC States in 2018 500 Environmental 400 1M IH 200 100 0  1 00 MTF $ 123 MM  200 Variable O& M Fixed O& M 0Fuel 0Capital 6 EF CON II1 L1 ING Incremental Annual Capital Cost in 2013 ( millions 1997$)

Environ Command & State Minoritv MTF EPA mental Control Az 1 3 4 a 21 CA 0  5  9  23  1 co  3  9  12  25 28 ID 0 0 0 0 0 NM 1 2 2 5 3 NV  4  9  12  25 3 OR  2  2  2  2 4 UT 0  1  1  2 6 Tribal Total  4  14  20 44 107 WY 2 4 6 11 43 1 3 4 9 0 ICF IncrementalAnnual Capital Cost in 2018 ( millions 1997$)

Environ Command & State Minority MTf  PA mental Control Az  1 3 4  22 22 CA 0  5  9  27  1 co 3 11 10  24 27 ID 2 2 2 2 0 2 4 3  10 5  1  1  1  16 0 OR 3 3 3 3 4 UT  1 3 2  20 7 4 6 8 20 45 NM NV WY Tribal  2  3  5  33 1 Total 9 23 17  127 110 7 L B ICpl< ey Drivers: Changes in Wholesale C 0 N I U L'FI N t in Electricity Prices I Electric Distribution Companies I. Changes in electricity prices affects industrial, commercialand residential customers.

I * Changes in wholesaleelectricity prices affects utility revenuesand shareholder profits.

11 CommercialAndustrial Users of Electricity Residential User of Electricity * Changes in electricity prices for the  Changes in electricity prices affects residential commercialindustrialsector affects the costof consumers as change in Consumer Price Index raw material inputs. ( CPI) and purchasingpower  Non electricsectors that compete regionally Changes In CPI directly affects real after tax wage are able to pass throughinput cost changes to rate, and has indirect effects on migration, labor their consumers. force and government services.

change in competitivenessrelative to Wholesale Electricity Prices 1p1 Projected changes ( relative to the baseline) in wholesale energy prices from IPM are used to derive changes in retail energy prices paid by residential, commercial and industrial sectors.

I We assume competitive market conditions where changes in wholesale energy prices are the only price impacts observed by end users under a policy. Any unrecoverable costs are absorbed by shareholders; revenues in excess of costs are passed on to shareholders in the form of increased dividends.

8 CDNLU LTlNG Wholesale Electricity Prices ( Continued) Wholesale energy prices in IPM represent the variable cost of the marginal generating unit and simulate continuously clearing competitive electric generation markets.

M Electricity prices only change if the variable cost of production of the marginal unit changes.

I Electricity price impacts in the command & control scenario are small relative to the trading scenarios because capital investment ( which does not directly influence variable operating cost) dominate the compliance strategy under ICF CONSU LilfiG Wholesale Electricity Prices ( Continued) I Since fuel costs ( which directly influence variable cost of operation) dominate incremental cost under the trading scenarios, electricity price impacts under the trading scenarios are relatively more pronounced.

m Decline in electricity prices in 2013 represent inter temporal tradeoffs in anticipation of the policy in 2018. h I 9 ICF CDNSULrlNG Wholesale Electricity Price Impacts Stale Minoriiy I MTF I 2013 Enwronmental I Command& ConVol EPA 1997 mills percent 1897 mills percent kWh change  A2  0.32  0.2% CA  0.19  0.7% 4.33  0.1 % CO  0.17  0.7%  0.32  02% ID  0.19  0.7%  0.33  0.1% NM  0.19 4.7%  0.33  0.1% NV  0.18  0.7%  0.33  02% OR  0.18  0.7%  0.33  0.1K UT  0.18  0.7%  0.32  0.2% WY  0.17  03%  0.32  0. z % Tribal  0.17  0.7%/  0.32  1.30.1  0.43  1.7% 1  0.81  3.2% 1  0.05  02% Average  0.18 I  0.32 1  0.42 I  0 80 I  004 Wholesale Electricity Price Impacts 2018 State Minority I MTF I EPA I Environmentill Command & Control 1997 mills percan ' 1997 mills psrcen 11997 malls percan ' 1997mills psrcen 1997 mills percent IkWh changa 1 IkWh chanBi 1 RWh change / kWh change A2 0.18 0.7% I 041 17% 0.96 3.9% 0.0% CA 0.29 1.1% 0.50 2.0% 063 25% 1.22 4.8% 0.05 0.2% CO 0.18 0.7% 0.31 1.3% 041 17% I 0.96 3.9% 0.0% ID 0.24 1.0% 0.37 1.5% 051 20% 1.12 4.5% 0.03 0.1% NM 0.26 1.0% 0.39 1.5% 053 21% 1.16 4.6% 0.04 0.2% NV 0.24 0.9% 0.41 1.6% 052 21% 1.09 4.4% 0.03 0.1% OR 026 %. OR 0.39 1.5% 053 21% 1.16 4.6% 0.04 0.2% UT 0.22 0.9% 037 1.5% 048 19% 1.04 42% 0.02 0.1% WY 0.18 0.7% 0.31 1.3% 041 17% 0.96 3.9% 0.0% Tribal 0.18 0.7% 0.31 13% 041 17% 0.96 3.9% 0.0% Average 0.22 0.37 0 48 1.06 0.02 10 t 3 CONSULTING ICF Fuel Mix Impacts in REMI Fuel Productionand Consumption I Changes in the value of coalproduced Changes in the value of gas consumptionby the ekcttic utility and non utilitysector Changes in fuel expenditures by sector and region is modeled as a change in dividends for publiGutilitysector companies and as production costs for nonpublic utility sector Companies I I 1 Coal Gas * Change in the value of coal producedaffects REMI determines the share of gas consumption the mining sector in REMI that is produced within a particular region FU~ IProduction & Consumption m Regional coal production is a key driver to the REMI model and is based on changes in coal production by state as projected by IPM.

E A coal producer experiences revenue losses ( gains) when less ( more) coal is produced and coal prices decrease ( increase) due to lower ( higher) quantity of coal demanded.

1p Changes in coal production have been valued at the market clearing mine mouth price based on IPM projections.

Changes in gas consumption, based on IPM projections, also feed into the REMI model I _ I t CONSULllNG ICF Impacts on Coal Markets Coal prices and coal production in IPM are endogenously determined in IPM and are based on coal supply curves.

rn Coal revenues increase under the trading scenarios. The total increase in the GCVTC region is less than a percent ( 0.7 %) in 2018 under the Environmental scenario.

m Coal revenues decline under the Command & Control scenario. The total decline in the GCVTC region is less than a percent ( 0.5 %) in 2018.

ICF impacts on Coal Markets CDNSULilNG Trading Scenarios B Although coal based generation ( and coal consumption) decreases in the 9 states GCVTC region in the Trading scenarios, coal production in the same 9 state region increases.

E Revenues from coal production from the 9 states region increases as the SO, reduction requirement becomes more stringent across the trading scenarios.

Increase in coal revenues is largely due to increased exports of western coals to other parts of the countrv.

12 ICF Impacts on Coal Markets CONSULrl NG Trading Scenarios ( Continued)

1 Increased demand for western coals is offset by decreased demand for coal from other regions of the country, predominantly the mid west.

N lncreased export of western coal to other parts of country reflect:

 Decreased demand for coal in the GCVTC region.

 Less stringent national SO, cap due to SO, reductions inthe GCVTC region. This leads to increased coal generation in the rest of the country.

Impacts on Coal Markets CON I ULTlN G Command & Control Scenario 1 Under the command and control scenario coal revenues in the GCVTC region declines.

1 Command & control is a capital intensive program that does not lower coal purchases in the GCVTC region:

 Coal consumption increases slightly in the GCVTC region.

 lncreased coal demand in the 9 state region is largely the result of additional new coal capacity.

13 I ICF Impacts on Coal Markets CON SI1 L IIN G Command & Control Scenario ( Continued) rn Increased coal demand in GCVTC region:

 Puts upward pressure on western coal prices and plants capable of receiving non western coal switch away from western coal.

 Decline in export of western coal to other parts of the country leads to a decline in coal production in the western states.

rn Production cuts in the western states are balanced by production increases in the Appalachian region.

ic CONSUL F : lNG Coal Revenue Impacts by State in 2013 ( millions 1997$) Environ Command State Minority MTF EPA mental & Control AZ CA co ID NM  0.01 NV OR UT  0.31 WY 2.87 2.93 2.95 2.85  30.70 Tribal  0.12 Total 2.87 2.93 2.95 2.85  31.14 14 ICF LoN5ULiiNG Coal Revenue Impacts by State in 2018 ( millions 1997$) Environ Command State Minority MTF EPA mental & Control HL CA co 13.40 ID  NM  0.01 0.00  0.22  0.01 NV  OR  UT  21.02 30.20 52.08 WY 4.65  6.80  6.30  30.58  12.68 Tribal  0.12  6.25  19.03  0.12 Total 4.65 14.09 17.65 15.65  12.81 Gas Consumption s Change in gas consumption is relatively small under the Command & Control scenario because the policy does not create incentives to shift to natural gas.

m Gas consumption increases with the stringency of the trading program because increased generation from gas is a significant compliance strategy.

15 ICF CONSUL I ING Gas Consumption by State in 2013 ( millions 1997$)

Environ Command State Minority MTF EPA mental & Control A2 9 20 26 53 0 CA 2  25  42  100 0 co  3  6  9  18 6 ID 0 I 2 5  2 NM 4 12 16 33  2 NV  8  20  26  53 5 OR  6  6  6  6  3 UT 4 11 14 27 0 WY 8 21 30 60 44 Tribal 6 14 19 37 0 Total 16 22 24 38 48 5CF CONSULTtN G Gas Consumption by State in 2018 ( millions 1997$) Environ Command State Minority MTF EPA mental & Control A2 7 17 24 92 0 CA 5  16  27  4  1 co 7 16 22 59 0 ID  1  1  1 0 0 NM 3 6 9 29 0 NV I 4 6 11 0 OR  6  6  6  6  3 UT 3 8 12 39 0 WY 7 16 22 188 47 Tribal 5 12 16 48 0 Total 31 56 77 456 43 16 !. CFPermit Trading Impacts in REMI Revenue Impacts from Allocations I  Allowance allocation is comparedto projectedemissions to determine net allowance position by sector and geographic area Revenue impacts from allocation depend on net allowance position and permit price I Non Tribal Revenue impacts from allocations for sectors ' that compete regionallyflows through as changes in dividends for shareholders Revenue impacts from allocations for sectors that compete nationallyflow throughto the production cost of that sector ICF CONLULTING I 1 Tribal Revenueimpacts from allocation to tribal areas flow through as changes in tribal government expenditures.

Allowance Allocation Revenues I Revenues ( or expenses) from net allowance sales ( or purchases) represent the net position of each state given the initial distribution of allowances and projected emissions.

mi Data on the distribution of allowances by sector and ' state were provided by MTF participants.

P Allowance prices and the emissions in each state were projected by IPM.

IE A state sells allowances if its allocation exceeds its emissions and buys allowances if its emissions exceeds its allocations.

17 CONSULTING Allowance Revenue Impacts in 2018 ( millions 1997$) Minority MTF EPA Environmental AZ 3.5 3.2 6.5 17.8 CA  0.4  4.1  7.5 ,  24.8 co  5.3 2.9  0.4 5.9 ID 1.6  0.4.  2.0  1 1.4 NM  2.6  2.9  2.4  31 . O NV  7.6  12.6  17.8  20.3 OR  2.0  5.5  9.0  22.1 UT  9.1  8.6  1 3.7  24.1 WY 7.6 6.8 14.4 47.6 Tribal 14.2 22.4 30.7 61.9 18 EF CONS I1 IT1 WG Economic Impacts B For the purposes of this analysis, three indicators of economic impacts are reported:  Employment,

 Gross regionalproduct, and  Real personaldisposable income.

I

I ICF Review of Key Assumptions m Sectors that compete regionally are able to flow through changes in productioncost to prices.

8 Sectors that compete nationally are unable to flow through production cost increases to priceand pass through these changes to shareholders ( as changes in profits).

Electric utility sector operates in a competitive regional market. To the extent that price increases are reflected in wholesale electric prices, they are recovered. Excess recovery or under recovery are flowed through to shareholders.

I Shareholders are distributed across the country and are approximated by the distribution of personal income. On this basis, approximately twenty percent of the shareholders are estimated to be located in the nin 19 I ICF Economic Impacts for GCVTC CONSULIING States in 2013 Erniron command ~ nges Minority MTF EPA mental & Control Employment 1,965 3,738 4,180 7,801 4,473 GRP ( Million 9s) 127 241 264 489 244 Real Disp Pers Inc ( Million 9%) 94 172 217 410 84 Note: Totals might not match due to rounding. Environ Command % Change Minority MTF EPA mental & Control Employment 0.005 0.010 0.012 0.022 0.012 GRP 0.006 0.012 0.013 0.023 0.012 Real Disp Pers Inc 0.007 0.013 0.016 0.030 0.006  ! CE Economic Impacts for GCVTC States in 2018 Environ Command Changes Minority MTF EPA mental 8, Control Employment  926  1,418  1,434  7,918  625 GRP ( Million 92$)  29  43  22  271 42 Real Disp Pers Inc ( Million 92$)  78  133  159  525 44 Note: Totals might not match due to rounding.

Environ Command % Change Minority MTF EPA mental & Control Ernpfoyment  0.002  0.004  0.004  0.021  0.002 GRP  0.001  0.002  0.001  0.012  0.002 Real Disp Pers Inc  0.005  0.009  0.011  0.036  0.003 20 ICF CON ). U L1 ING Regional Economic Impacts E Changes in the three economic indicators are positive in 2013 and negative in 2018 by a similar order of magnitude.

m The magnitude of the changes in the three economic indicators are all very small, with no change in an economic indicator being larger than 0.05 percent at the regional level.

m Impacts on the three economic indicators are relatively small because the cost of the SO, reduction policies are all relatively small. Even the highest cost of $ 274 million to all sectors is well under one percent of the, total production cost oft IiEFCONSUITtNG Command & Control Scenario rn Economic impacts from the command and control scenario are positive in 2013 and comparable to the EPA trading scenario.

rn Increased economic activity in 2013 under the command and control scenario reflects the surge in capital investmentthat begins in 2013.

II The onetime surge in employment in 2013 is primarily due to capital investments under the command and control scenario. Employment levels decline with some lag.

21 I ICFCONS " IT1 N t Command & Control ( Continued)

m Economic impacts in 2078 under the command and control scenario, however, are negative, but of a more modest magnitude.

m Command and control scenario is a capital intensive program primarily affecting the electric utility sector.

8 Because under the command and control scenario most costs impacts are capital, electricity price impacts in competitive markets are relatively small.

I

ICF CON S "( TINS Command and Control a Declines in gross regional product and real personal disposable income occur in 2018 under the command and control scenario after positive impacts in 2013.

m For the command and control scenario, the longer term economic equilibrium would be expected to approach pre policy levels due to the fact that the policy reflects a one time shock to the region that does not systematically alter the non utility sectors.

PI Shareholders of the utility sector continue to bear the costs of the policy. However, these effects are distributed nationally, with, of the nine state area, only California bearing a significa 22  ICF CON 1U L TIN G Trading Scenarios I All trading scenarios yield an overall increase in all three economic indicators in 2013, and an overall decrease in the economic indicators in 2018.

The dampened decline in gross regional production in 2018 under the EPA scenario represents the lagged effects of 2013. EPA trading scenario, unlike the other trading scenario, has no incremental cost in 2013.

CONSULZING ICF Trading Scenarios Impacts ( Continued) II Economic impacts from the environmental scenario are greater than the other trading scenarios because in these scenarios nationally competing, non utility sectors bear a larger portion of the compliance cost relative to the other trading scenarios.

m Thus, they loose competitiveness and market share with attendant impacts on employment, wage rates, and household income.

E The Environmental Scenario also has the lowest level of capital investment, lower than the Base Case, thus employment impacts are largest.

23 CONSULTING ICF Trading Scenarios Impacts ( Continued) m California bears a large share of the impacts in employment, GRP and income relativeto other states. This is primarily due to its relative size. California is the largest of the nine states, in terms of employment, income and output.

 income was used as the proxy for shareholderdistribution. Sixty six percent of GCVTC utility shareholdersare assumed to be located in California.

 GCVTC electric utility shareholders realizea loss in income when increased electric utility expendituresdue to the policy are not recoveredthrough electric prices.

 California experiencesa larger than average increase in electric prices which increasesthe cost of productionfor all other inhustries.

COHSULrlNG ICF Trading Scenarios Impacts ( Continued)

R In addition, the mix of industry in California affects the relative impacts.

 Many of the industries located in California compete nationally and are not able to pass through the increased production cost from higher electricity prices.

 These industriesbecause less competitive as a result of the the increased production cost from electric price increase.

 Loss of competitivenessleads to lower output, resulting in lower employment, reduced income and lower gross regional product.

24 l! F Impact on Gross Regional Product in 2013 ( millions 1992$)

Environ Command State Minority MTF EPA mental & Control Az CA co ID NM NV OR UT WY Tribal Total 18 40 48 90 61 48 73 64 113 79 21 32 41 75 31 2 4 4 7 8 0 17 18 32 1 6 7 3 9  9 6 11 14 29 24 7 14 18 32 13 12 26 32 58 33 7 18 23 45 2 128 242 265 490 244 lOcF Impact on Gross Regional Product in 2018 ( millions 1992$)

State Minority MTF EPA A2  4 0.2 4 CA  53  102  126 co 13 39 47 ID  4  7  9 NM 1 1 1 NV 4  8 19 OR  9  17  26 UT  3 20 28 WY 16 13 18 Tribal 11 19 20 Total  29  43  22 E nvironmental  75  259 76  61  27 37  74 24 65 21  271 Com mand & Control 7  25  5 0 I  1 1  1 0  9 1  42 25  ICF CONSUL1 ING Impact on Employment in 2013 ( Number of Workers)

State Minority MTF EPA Az 298 688 850 CA 762 1,135 1,078 co 376 518 682 ID 44 79 79 NM  43 244 251 NV 110 147 58 OR 74 205 249 UT 117 215 270 WY 132 268 351 Tribal 100 247 314 Total 1,969 3,745 4,183 Environ Command mental & Control 1,595 1,041 1,906 1,027 1,253 746 150 120 411 19 185  173 579 377 486 279 618 1,005 618 30 7,801 4,471 I1 lockImpact on Employment by State in 2018 ( Number of Workers) Environ Command State Minority MTF EPA mental & Control Az  125  104  88  1,708 108 CA  963  1,775  2,197  4,285  459 co 165 585 679 641  45 ID  80  135  186  1,247 1 NM  25  36  74  653 22 NV 42  162 265 439  193 OR  167  314  466  1,281  34 UT  101 106 140  307 11 WY 132 109 126 133  48 Tribal 198 312 371 346 15 26 I

I ICF CDNlULllNG Impact on Real Disposable Personal Income by State in 2013 ( millions 1992$)

Environ Command State Minority MTF  PA mental 8 Control AZ 13 30 39 72 23 CA 31 48 48 91 20 co 21 41 56 104 I1 ID 2 3 3 6 4 NM 0 7 8 14 1 NV 9 7 19 38  8 OR 6 11 14 29 9 UT 5 9 11 21 6 WY 4 8 10 17 16 Tribal 3 8 10 19 1 I

Impact on Real Disposable Personal Income by State in 2018 ( millions 9992s)

Environ Command State Minority MTF EPA mental 8 Control A2  7  1 1  12  97 3 CA  52  97  121  213  29 co 2 11 13 8  2 ID  6  8  11  109 0 NM  2  3  5  24 0 NV  1  10 2 3  7 OR  13  22  31  69  2 UT  5  1  1  18 0 WY 4 3 3  6  5 Tribal 3 5 5 I 0 Total  78  133  159  525 27 I ICF CONSULTING Sensitivity Analysis rn Regionaleconomic impacts are sensitive to assumptions about the recovery from ratepayers of compliance cost borne by the electric generating industry.

8 We assumed that retail prices reflect competitive prices in wholesale markets based on marginal energy costs. Thus, revenues in excess of production costs accrue to shareholders.

m However, an alternate assumption that the electric utility sector may be able to fully recover its costs through price flow through to end user has a more extended impact on the regional economy.

JiCFCONLULTlNt Sensitivity Analysis ( Continued)

rn Under this alternate assumption of guaranteed cost recovery, the production cost of other sectors, using electricity as an input, increases.

I The following three slides detail the regional economic impact of a command and control scenario for 2013 and 2018 under these alternate assumptions regarding cost recovery.

28 CONSU iTlN1 1 ICF Economic Impacts by State Million 92 $ Az  2 CA 63 co  26 ID 4 NM  4 NV 6 OR 9 UT  1 WY 26 Tribal 0 I ICF Economic Impacts by State Percent Millicin 92 $ Percent 0.00  89 0.00 0.10  55 0.00  0.02  100  0.06 0.01  3  0.01  0.01  8  0.02 0.01  3 0.00 0.01  19  0.01 0.00  22  0.03 0.13  21  0.10 0.00  3  0.01 C0N5U1TlN~

Sensitivity Analysis Command 8 Control Scenario Changes in Real Disposable Income Million 92 $ Percent Million 92 $ Percent Az  37  0.03  76  0.06 CA 28 0  16 0 co  39  0.03  80  0.06 ID 1 0.01  1 0 NM  2  0.01  5  0.01 NV 5 0.01 5 0.01 OR 2 0  8 0 UT  4  0.01  14  0.03 WY I1 0.09  13  0.11 Tribal  1  0.01 I  1  0.01 29 Y b ' a.' 9 I CONSULTING ICF Economic Impacts by State la1ysis Sensitivity AI Command i3Contro Changes in Empl 2013 Persons Perceni Az  93 0. oc CA 865 0. oc co  310  0.01 ID 49 0.07 NM  69  0.01 NV 63 o. oa OR 155 0.01 Scenario byment 2018 Persons Percent  1,400  0.05  873 0.00  1,600  0.05  5  0.01  124  0.01 19 0.00  257  0.01 UT 42 0.00  334  0.02 WY 805 0.25  273  0.08 Tribal  3 0.00  3  0.01 Total 1.504  4.850 CONiUIilNt Conclusions Change in employment, gross regional product and disposable income are by state, and may appear to be more significant if the economic impacts are concentrated within the certain localities of a state. The modeling framework was constructed to report at the state level.

Employment, gross regional product and disposable income increasejust before a policy takes effect and decrease after the policy takes effect.

1 Changes in employment, gross regional product and disposable income represent anticipatedfluctuations in economic cycle due to policy.

30


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 92 (Friday, May 11, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27628-27631]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11064]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0525; FRL-9340-1]

[alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-Tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene); Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an exemption from the requirement
of a tolerance for residues of [alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-
tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) (CAS Reg.
Nos. 9036-19-5, 9002-93-1) when used as an inert ingredient at levels
not to exceed 7% in pesticide formulations applied to growing crops and
raw agricultural commodities after harvest. The Joint Inerts Task
Force, Cluster Support Team Number 5 submitted a petition to EPA under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), requesting
establishment of an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of [alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene).

DATES: This regulation is effective May 11, 2012. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received on or before July 10, 2012, and
must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR
part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0525. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

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

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular
entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

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

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR
part 180 through the Government Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl. To access the OCSPP test guidelines referenced in this
document electronically, please go to http://www.epa.gov/ocspp and
select ``Test Methods and Guidelines.''

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0525 in the subject line on the first
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before
July 10, 2012. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and
hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of
the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public
docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2
may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit a copy of
your non-CBI objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0525, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. Background

    In the Federal Register of August 26, 2011 (76 FR 53372) (FRL-8884-
9), EPA issued a notice pursuant to FFDCA section 408, 21 U.S.C. 346a,
announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 1E7858) by Joint
Inerts Task Force, Cluster Support Team 5, c/o CropLife America, 1156
15th St. NW., Suite 400, Washington, DC 20005. The petition requested
that 40 CFR 180.910 be amended by establishing an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of [alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-
tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) (CAS Reg.
Nos. 9036-19-5, 9002-93-1) when used as an inert ingredient at levels
not to exceed 7% in pesticide formulations

applied to growing crops and raw agricultural commodities after
harvest. That notice referenced a summary of the petition prepared by
Joint Inerts Task Force, Cluster Support Team 5, the petitioner, which
is available in the docket, http://www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the notice of filing.
    Previously, in the Federal Register of May 17, 2010 (75 FR 27443)
(FRL-8826-3), EPA established a time-limited tolerance exemption for
[alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-[omega]-
hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) (herein referred to in this document as
octylphenol ethoxylate) with an expiration date of May 17, 2012. The 2-
year time limitation was established for two purposes:
    1. To provide time for the development and submission of
confirmatory toxicity data to address equivocal results in the
available genotoxicity studies conducted on octylphenol ethoxylate (as
described in Unit IV.C., of the May 17, 2010 final rule); and
    2. To provide additional time, should the initial testing not
confirm EPA's conclusion regarding the lack of a cancer concern, for
registrants to attain EPA approval of registration amendments for
reformulation of their pesticide products to remove octylphenol
ethoxylate and to replace existing products with reformulated products.
    In establishing the time-limited tolerance exemption for
octylphenol ethoxylate, EPA stated that if the submitted data confirmed
its conclusion regarding a lack of cancer concern, the Agency intended
to remove the expiration date from the tolerance exemption prior to
expiration of the exemption.

III. Inert Ingredient Definition

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

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish an
exemption from the requirement for a tolerance (the legal limit for a
pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that
the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines
``safe'' to mean that ``there is a reasonable certainty that no harm
will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue,
including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for
which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through
drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to
give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the
pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to
infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical
residue * * *.''
    EPA establishes exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance only
in those cases where it can be clearly demonstrated that the risks from
aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residues under reasonably
foreseeable circumstances will pose no appreciable risks to human
health. In order to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to
pesticide inert ingredients, the Agency considers the toxicity of the
inert in conjunction with possible exposure to residues of the inert
ingredient through food, drinking water, and through other exposures
that occur as a result of pesticide use in residential settings. If EPA
is able to determine that a finite tolerance is not necessary to ensure
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from
aggregate exposure to the inert ingredient, an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance may be established.
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(A), and the factors
specified in FFDCA section 408(c)(2)(B), EPA has reviewed the available
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a
determination on aggregate exposure for octylphenol ethoxylate
including exposure resulting from the exemption established by this
action.
    In the Federal Register of May 17, 2010, EPA issued a final rule
establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of octylphenol ethoxylate when used as an inert ingredient at
levels not to exceed 7% in pesticide formulations applied to growing
crops and raw agricultural commodities after harvest under 40 CFR
180.910 with an expiration date of May 17, 2012. EPA has determined
that establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of octylphenol ethoxylate when used as an inert ingredient an
inert ingredient at levels not to exceed 7% in pesticide formulations
applied to growing crops and raw agricultural commodities after harvest
will not significantly change the risk assessments the Agency relied on
to support the May 17, 2010, tolerance action, as explained in this
unit.
    As part of the Agency's conduct of the risk assessment in support
of the May 17, 2010, tolerance action, it was determined that there
were no acute, chronic, short- or intermediate term aggregate risks of
concern. With regards to aggregate cancer risk, the assessment
concluded that based on a weight of the evidence consideration of the
available data, the Agency believed that cancer risks would be
negligible. However, due to the equivocal findings in the mutagenicity
data base, the Agency asked for confirmatory data. Specifically, EPA
recommended that supporters of the octylphenol ethoxylate tolerance
exemption perform the following studies for confirmatory purposes:
    A new Ames assay (OCSPP Harmonized Guideline 870.5100--Bacterial
reverse mutation test) and a mouse lymphoma assay (OCSPP Harmonized
Guideline 870.5300--in vitro Mammalian cell gene mutation test).
    A bone marrow assay (OCSPP Harmonized Guideline 870.5395--Mammalian
erythrocyte micronucleus test).
    Since in vivo mutagenicity studies such as the bone marrow assay
are generally regarded as more definitive than in vitro studies, and a
negative result in the bone marrow test may outweigh whatever results
are found in the Ames test and mouse lymphoma assay, supporters of the
octylphenol ethoxylate tolerance exemption were given the option of
conducting the mammalian erythrocyte micronucleus test in lieu of the
two in vitro mutagenicity studies. If those data did not confirm EPA's
cancer conclusion, then EPA would need 2-year cancer bioassays in the
mouse and rat (OCSPP

Harmonized Guideline 870.4200--Carcinogenicity (mouse) and OCSPP
Harmonized Guideline 870.4300--Combined Chronic Toxicity/
Carcinogenicity (rat)) to make a safety finding in support of the
tolerance exemption.
    In response to the May 17, 2010, final rule, the Joint Inerts Task
Force, Cluster Support Team Number 5 conducted an in vivo Mouse Bone
Marrow Erythrocyte Micronucleus Test Following Oral Administration
(OCSPP Harmonized Test Guideline 870.5395) of the representative test
compound, poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl),[alpha]-[4-(1,1,3,3-
tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-[omega]-hydroxy- (CAS Reg. No. 9002-93-1).
These data were submitted to the Agency on November 12, 2010 (Master
Record Identification Number 48293301).
    The data were evaluated by EPA and it was determined that the test
substance did not induce numerical or structural chromosomal damage,
providing further confirmation that octylphenol ethoxylate is not of
concern for aggregate cancer risk. Further details of this evaluation
can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in the document
``Octylphenol Ethoxylates--(JITF CST 5 Inert Ingredients).--Review of
Confirmatory Mutagencity Toxicity Data'' in docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OPP-2011-0525.
    Refer to the May 17, 2010, Federal Register document, available at
http://www.regulations.gov, for a detailed discussion of the aggregate
risk assessment and determination of safety.
    Therefore, based on this information and the findings in the final
rule published in the Federal Register of May 17, 2010, EPA concludes
that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the
general population, or to infants and children from aggregate exposure
to octylphenol ethoxylate residues.

V. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    An analytical method is not required for enforcement purposes since
the Agency is establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance without any numerical limitation.

B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S.
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA
section 408(b)(4). The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nation Food
and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards
program, and it is recognized as an international food safety
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United
States is a party. EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from
a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain
the reasons for departing from the Codex level. The Codex has not
established a MRL for octylphenol ethoxylate.

VI. Conclusions

    Therefore, an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance is
established for residues of [alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-
tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-[omega]-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) when used as
an inert ingredient at levels not to exceed 7% in pesticide
formulations applied to growing crops and raw agricultural commodities
after harvest under 40 CFR 180.910.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This final rule establishes an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition
submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order
12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993). Because this final rule has been exempted from review
under Executive Order 12866, this final rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997). This final rule does not contain any
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq.) do not apply.
    This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. In addition,
this final rule does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any
unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note).

VIII. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal
Register. This final rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: April 26, 2012.
G. Jeffrey Herndon,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. In Sec.  180.910, the table is amended by revising the entry for the
inert ingredient which reads in part ``[alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-
tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]'' to read as follows:

Sec.  180.910  Inert ingredients used pre and post-harvest; exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Inert ingredients               Limits               Uses
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
[alpha]-[p-(1,1,3,3-              Not to exceed 7%    Surfactants
 tetramethylbutyl)phenyl]-         of pesticide        related adjuvants
 [omega]-                          formulation.        of surfactants.
 hydroxypoly(oxyethylene)
 produced by the condensation of
 1 mole of p-(1,1,3,3-
 tetramethylbutyl)phenol with a
 range of 1-14 or 30-70 moles of
 ethylene oxide: If a blend of
 products is used, the average
 range number of moles of
 ethylene oxide reacted to
 produce any product that is a
 component of the blend shall be
 in the range of 1-14 or 30-70
 (CAS Reg. Nos. 9036-19-5, 9002-
 93-1).

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-11064 Filed 5-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: February 25, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 37)]
[Notices]
[Page 8693]
[DOCID:fr25fe10-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER10-711-000]

Respond Power LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

February 17, 2010.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Respond Power LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is March 9, 2010.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-3802 Filed 2-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 101 (Thursday, May 27, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28473-28476]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11081]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2006-26107; Project Identifier 2004-SW-30-AD; Amendment
39-21549; AD 2021-10-16]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Carson Helicopters, Inc.; Croman
Corporation; Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation; and Siller Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Carson Helicopters, Inc., Model S-61L and SH-3H helicopters; Croman
Corporation Model SH-3H helicopters; Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation
Model S-61A, S-61D, S-61E, and S-61V helicopters; and Siller
Helicopters Model CH-3E and SH-3A helicopters. This AD was prompted by
an accident. This AD requires tracking hours time-in-service (TIS) and
external lift cycles (lift cycles) for certain main gearbox left and
right input freewheel unit (IFWU) assemblies. This AD also requires
determining the type of IFWU assembly installed and depending on the
results, calculating the moving average, repetitive inspections,
recording certain information, replacing parts, and marking parts. The
FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective July 1, 2021.

    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of July 1,
2021.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact your local Sikorsky Field Representative or Sikorsky's Service
Engineering Group at Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, 124 Quarry Road,
Trumbull, CT 06611; telephone 1-800-Winged-S; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Operators may also log on to the
Sikorsky 360 website at https://www.sikorsky360.com. You may view this
service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX
76177. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2006-
26107.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2006-26107; 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, 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Isabel Saltzman, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Boston ACO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA
01803; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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 all Sikorsky Aircraft
Corporation Model S-61 A, D, E, and V helicopters; Croman Corporation
Model SH-3H helicopters, Carson Helicopters, Inc. Model S-61L
helicopters; and Siller Helicopters Model CH-3E and SH-3A helicopters.
The NPRM published in the Federal Register on October 30, 2006 (71 FR
63272). The NPRM was prompted by an accident in which the left and
right IFWU assembly on a helicopter slipped or disengaged resulting in
both engines overspeeding, engine shutdowns, and loss of engine power
to the transmissions. In the NPRM, the FAA proposed to require creating
a component history card or equivalent record and recording the hours
TIS and the lift cycles for each affected main gearbox left and right
IFWU assembly. The NPRM also proposed to require determining if the
IFWU assembly is a repetitive external lift (REL) or non-REL IFWU
assembly. The determination includes calculating a moving average of
lift cycles per hour TIS at specified intervals on each IFWU assembly.
For REL IFWU assemblies, the NPRM proposed to require repetitive
inspections, which include visual and dimensional inspections, of the
IFWU assembly for wear, surface distress, and endplay, recording
certain information, and replacing affected parts with an airworthy
part. In addition, the NPRM proposed to require permanently marking the
REL IFWU camshafts and gear housings with the letters ``REL'' on the
surface of these parts.
    The FAA issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM)
to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all Carson
Helicopters, Inc., Model S-61L and SH-3H helicopters; Croman
Corporation Model SH-3H helicopters; Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation
Model S-61A, S-61D, S-61E, and S-61V helicopters; and Siller
Helicopters Model CH-3E and SH-3A helicopters. The SNPRM published in
the Federal Register on March 15, 2021 (86 FR 14285). The SNPRM was
prompted by a determination that additional camshaft and gear housing
part numbers need to be marked and the applicability and certain
compliance times need clarification. The SNPRM proposed to require the
same actions specified in the NPRM. The SNPRM also proposed to mark
additional camshaft and gear housing part numbers. Additionally, the
SNPRM clarified the applicability and certain compliance times. The FAA
is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received comments from one commenter. The commenter was
Croman Corp. The commenter supported the SNPRM without change.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments
received, and determined that air safety requires adopting the AD as
proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe
condition on these products. Except for minor editorial changes, this
AD is adopted as proposed in the SNPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Alert Service
Bulletin 61B35-67B, Revision B, dated August 11, 2003. This service
information specifies, among other actions, procedures for inspections,
which includes visual and dimensional inspections, of the IFWU assembly
for wear, surface distress, and endplay, and for recording certain
information. 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.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA also reviewed Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation All Operators
Letter (AOL) CCS-61-AOL-04-0005, dated May 18, 2004. This service
information provides an example and additional information about
tracking cycles and the moving average procedure.
    The FAA also reviewed Sikorsky Aircraft S-61L/N Overhaul Manual,
SA4045-83, Revision 20, dated August 15, 2003, as revised by Temporary
Revisions 65-193, -194, -195, and -196, which contains the overhaul
procedures for the IFWU assembly.

Differences Between This AD and the Service Information

    The effectivity of Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Alert Service
Bulletin 61B35-67B, Revision B, dated August 11, 2003, includes Model
S-61 L, N, NM, and R helicopters. However, for those helicopters, the
unsafe condition is addressed in AD 2007-01-05, Amendment 39-14876 (72
FR 1139, January 10, 2007). Therefore, those helicopters are not
included in the applicability of this AD.
    Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Alert Service Bulletin 61B35-67B,
Revision B, dated August 11, 2003, specifies contacting Sikorsky and
providing information to Sikorsky. This AD does not require you to
contact Sikorsky or provide information to Sikorsky.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 55 helicopters of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
            Action                 Labor cost          Parts cost       Cost per  product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Creating history card;          Up to 8 work-     Up to $1,975.......  Up to $2,655.......  Up to $146,025.
 determining type of IFWU        hours x $85 per
 assembly; inspecting IFWU       hour = $680.
 assemblies; recording
 information; replacing parts;
 and marking certain parts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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:

2021-10-16 Carson Helicopters, Inc.; Croman Corporation; Sikorsky
Aircraft Corporation; and Siller Helicopters: Amendment 39-21549;
Docket No. FAA-2006-26107; Project Identifier 2004-SW-30-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective July 1, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all helicopters identified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (6) of this AD, certificated in any category
including restricted.
    (1) Carson Helicopters, Inc., Model S-61L helicopters.
    (2) Carson Helicopters, Inc., Model SH-3H helicopters.
    (3) Croman Corporation Model SH-3H helicopters.
    (4) Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Model S-61A, S-61D, S-61E, and
S-61V helicopters.
    (5) Siller Helicopters Model CH-3E helicopters.
    (6) Siller Helicopters Model SH-3A helicopters.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 6310, Engine/
Transmission Coupling.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by an accident in which the left and right
input freewheel unit (IFWU) assembly on a helicopter slipped or
disengaged, resulting in both engines overspeeding, engine
shutdowns, and loss of engine power to the transmissions. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address slipping of the main gearbox IFWU
assembly, loss of engine power, and subsequent loss of control of
the helicopter.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Creation of History Card or Equivalent and Daily Actions

    Within 10 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective date
of this AD, do the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of
this AD.
    (1) Create an external lift component history card or equivalent
record for each IFWU assembly, part number (P/N) 61074-35000-041
through 61074-35000-063 inclusive.
    (2) Count and, at the end of each day's operations, record the
number of external lift cycles (lift cycles) performed and the hours
TIS for each IFWU assembly, P/N 61074-35000-041 through 61074-35000-
063 inclusive. A ``lift cycle'' is defined as the lifting of an
external load and subsequent release of the load. Record the lift
cycles and hours TIS on the external lift component history card or
equivalent record.

(h) Determination of IFWU Assembly Type and Calculations

    (1) Upon reaching 250 hours TIS after the effective date of this
AD on each IFWU assembly, P/N 61074-35000-041 through 61074-35000-
063 inclusive, determine whether the IFWU assembly is a repetitive
external lift (REL) or non-REL IFWU assembly by using a 250-hour TIS
moving average. To perform the calculation, divide the total number
of lift cycles performed during the first 250 hours TIS by 250. The
result will be the first moving average calculation of lift cycles
per hour TIS.
    (i) If the calculation specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD
results in more than 6 lift cycles per hour TIS, the IFWU assembly
is an REL IFWU assembly.
    (ii) If the calculation specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD
results in 6 or less lift cycles per hour TIS, the IFWU assembly is
a Non-REL IFWU assembly.
    (2) For each IFWU assembly determined to be a Non-REL IFWU
assembly based on the first calculation of the 250-hour TIS moving
average for lift cycles specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD:
Within 50 hours TIS after the determination, and thereafter at
intervals of 50 hours TIS, recalculate the average lift cycles per
hour TIS to determine whether the IFWU assembly is an REL or non-REL
IFWU assembly. To perform the calculation, subtract the total number
of lift cycles performed during the first 50-hour TIS interval used
in the previous moving average calculation from the total number of
lift cycles performed on the IFWU assembly during the previous 300
hours TIS. Divide this result by 250. The result will be the next or
subsequent moving average calculation of lift cycles per hour TIS.
    (i) If any calculation specified in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD
results in more than 6 lift

cycles per hour TIS, the IFWU assembly is an REL IFWU assembly.
    (ii) If any calculation specified in paragraph (h)(2) of this AD
results in 6 or less lift cycles per hour TIS, the IFWU assembly is
a Non-REL IFWU assembly.

    Note 1 to paragraph (h)(2): Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation All
Operators Letter (AOL) CCS-61-AOL-04-0005, dated May 18, 2004,
provides an example and additional information about tracking cycles
and the moving average procedure.

    Note 2 to paragraph (h)(2): The following is a sample
calculation for subsequent 50 hour TIS intervals. Assume the total
number of lift cycles for the first 50 hour TIS interval used in the
previous moving average calculation = 450 lift cycles and the total
number of lift cycles for the previous 300 hours TIS = 2,700 lift
cycles. The subsequent moving average of lift cycles per hour TIS =
(2,700-450) divided by 250 = 9 lift cycles per hour TIS.

    (3) Once an IFWU assembly is determined to be an REL IFWU
assembly, it remains an REL IFWU assembly for the rest of its
service life and is subject to the inspection for REL IFWU
assemblies required by paragraph (i) of this AD.
    (4) Once an IFWU assembly is determined to be an REL IFWU
assembly, you no longer need to perform the 250-hour TIS moving
average calculation required by paragraph (h)(2) of this AD, but you
must continue to count and record the lift cycles as required by
paragraph (g)(2) of this AD.

(i) Repetitive Inspections of REL IFWU Assemblies and Replacement

    For each REL IFWU assembly, as determined by paragraph (h)(1) or
(2) of this AD:
    (1) Within 500 hours TIS or 7,500 lift cycles, whichever occurs
first since the assembly was determined to be a REL IFWU assembly,
and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 hours TIS or 7,500
lift cycles, whichever occurs first, inspect for wear, surface
distress, and endplay by following paragraphs B.(1) through B.(6) of
the Accomplishment Instructions of Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation
Alert Service Bulletin 61B35-67B, Revision B, dated August 11, 2003.
Record all the information specified in Figures 1 through 3 of the
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Alert Service Bulletin 61B35-67B,
Revision B, dated August 11, 2003. You may record this information
on any suitable maintenance record, or you may use the Sikorsky
evaluation forms provided in Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Alert
Service Bulletin 61B35-67B, Revision B, dated August 11, 2003. This
AD does not require you to contact Sikorsky or provide information
to Sikorsky.
    (2) If during any inspection required by paragraph (i)(1) of
this AD, any IFWU assembly part is found whose average wear, wear
marks, surface distress, or endplay exceeds the limits specified in
paragraphs B.(1) through B.(6) of the Accomplishment Instructions of
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Alert Service Bulletin 61B35-67B,
Revision B, dated August 11, 2003, before further flight, replace
the affected part with an airworthy IFWU assembly part.

    Note 3 to paragraph (i)(2): Sikorsky Aircraft S-61L/N Overhaul
Manual, SA4045-83, Revision 20, dated August 15, 2003, as revised by
Temporary Revisions 65-193, -194, -195, and -196, contains the
overhaul procedures for the IFWU assembly.

(j) Part Marking

    For each REL IFWU assembly, as determined by paragraph (h)(1) or
(2) of this AD: Before further flight after the assembly was
determined to be an REL IFWU assembly, permanently mark IFWU
camshafts, P/N 61350-24052, 61350-24072, S6135-20611, S6135-20614
and S6137-23075, and IFWU gear housings, P/N 61350-24051, 61350-
24068, S6135-20695, and S6137-23057, with the letters ``REL''. Mark
the camshafts by applying etching ink on the surface of the part
that is 0.5-inch square with the depth of the letters not to exceed
0.001 inch. Before further flight and after etching, neutralize the
etched surface and oil to prevent corrosion.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) 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 local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l)(1) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(l) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Isabel Saltzman,
Aviation Safety Engineer, Boston ACO Branch, FAA, 1200 District
Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (m)(3) and (4) of this AD.

(m) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Alert Service Bulletin 61B35-
67B, Revision B, dated August 11, 2003.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact your
local Sikorsky Field Representative or Sikorsky's Service
Engineering Group at Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, 124 Quarry Road,
Trumbull, CT 06611; telephone 1-800-Winged-S; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Operators may also log on to
the Sikorsky 360 website at https://www.sikorsky360.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room
6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on May 4, 2021.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-11081 Filed 5-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P