[Federal Register: September 3, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 170)]
[Notices]
[Page 45636]
[DOCID:fr03se09-54]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER09-1400-000]

Milford Wind Corridor Phase I, LLC; Notice of Filing

August 27, 2009.
    Take notice that, on August 26, 2009, Milford Wind Corridor Phase
I, LLC filed to supplement its filing in the above-captioned proceeding
with information required under the Commission's regulations. Such
filing served to reset the filing date in this proceeding.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on September 16, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-21243 Filed 9-2-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 200 (Thursday, October 16, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 62090-62091]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24346]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0629; FRL-9917-68-Region-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; State Boards Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve
the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the purpose of addressing the State
Boards' requirements for all criteria pollutants of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). In the Final Rules section of
this Federal Register, EPA is approving the Commonwealth's SIP
submittal as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no
adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in
the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response
to this action, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives
adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment
period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing by November 17, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2014-0629 by one of the following methods:

    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0629, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Air Protection Division,
Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2014-0629. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the Commonwealth's
submittal are available at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection, Bureau of Air Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market
Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ruth Knapp,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For further information, please see the
information provided in the direct final action, with the same title,
that is located in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this
Federal Register publication. Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.

    Dated: September 23, 2014.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2014-24346 Filed 10-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


AIPORT DEICING CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE

OW-2004-0038

DCN __AD00730______________

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION (CBI) PER

40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 148 (Wednesday, August 3, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47350-47352]
[FR Doc No: 2022-16531]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0615]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Sausalito Scattering Fireworks Display, Sausalito,
CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
navigable waters of the San Francisco Bay, near Sausalito, CA, in
support of the Sausalito Scattering Fireworks display on August 8,
2022. This safety zone is necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and
the marine environment from the dangers associated with pyrotechnics.
Unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering into,
transiting through, or remaining in the safety zone without permission
of the Captain of the Port San Francisco or a designated
representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. on August 8,
2022.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2022-0615 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant William K. Harris Coast Guard Sector San
Francisco; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. The Coast Guard
did not receive final details for this event until July 20, 2022. It is
impracticable to go through the full notice and comment rule making
process because the Coast Guard must establish this safety zone by
August 8, 2022 and lacks sufficient time to provide a reasonable
comment period and to consider those comments before issuing the rule.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for

making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the
Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of this rule would be
contrary to public interest because immediate action is necessary to
protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from the
potential safety hazards associated with the fireworks display in the
San Francisco Bay near Sausalito, CA on August 8, 2022.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port San
Francisco has determined that potential hazards associated with the
Sausalito Scattering Fireworks Display on August 8, 2022, will be a
safety concern for anyone within a 100-foot radius of the fireworks
display dock during loading and staging and anyone within a 600-foot
radius of the fireworks starting 30 minutes before the fireworks
display is scheduled to commence and ending 30 minutes after the
conclusion of the fireworks display. For this reason, this temporary
safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine
environment in the navigable waters around the fireworks display
location and during the fireworks display.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone from 6:30 p.m. until
9:30 p.m. on August 8, 2022. During the loading and staging of the
fireworks display until 30 minutes prior to the start of the fireworks
display, the safety zone will encompass the navigable waters around and
under the fireworks display location, from surface to bottom, within a
circle formed by connecting all points 100 feet out from the fireworks
display. The pyrotechnics will be loaded and staged on the dock from
6:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on August 8, 2022, at Clipper Yacht Harbor in
Sausalito, CA. The display vessel will transit from the dock to the
display location from 8:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., where it will remain
until the conclusion of the fireworks display.
    At 8:30 p.m. on August 8, 2022, 15 minutes prior to the
commencement of the 15 minute display, the safety zone will increase in
size and encompass the navigable waters around and under the fireworks
display vessel, from surface to bottom, within a circle formed by
connecting all points 600 feet from the circle center at approximate
position 37[deg]50'12'' N, 122[deg]28'01'' W (NAD 83). The safety zone
will terminate at 9:30 p.m. on August 8, 2022 or as announced via
Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
    This regulation is necessary to keep persons and vessels away from
the immediate vicinity of the fireworks loading, staging, and display
location. Except for persons and vessels authorized by the Captain of
the Port San Francisco (COTP) or the COTP's designated representative,
no person or vessel may enter or remain in the restricted area. A
``designated representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander,
including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer
operating a Coast Guard vessel, or a Federal, State, or local officer
designated by or assisting the COTP in the enforcement of the safety
zone. This regulation is necessary to ensure the safety of personnel,
vessels, and the marine environment.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 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. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the limited
duration and narrowly tailored geographic area of the safety zone.
Although this rule restricts access to the waters encompassed by the
safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be significant because
the local waterways users will be notified to ensure the safety zone
will result in minimum impact. The vessels desiring to transit through
or around the temporary safety zone may do so upon express permission
from the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A. above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial

direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a
temporary safety zone in the navigable waters around the loading,
staging, and display locations located in Sausalito, CA and on the San
Francisco Bay. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-
01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting
this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on
locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70054; 3 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6,
and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1,
Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. Sec.  165.T11-109 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-109  Safety Zone; Sausalito Scattering Fireworks Display,
San Francisco Bay, Sausalito, CA

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: all navigable
waters of the San Francisco Bay, from surface to bottom, within a
circle connecting all points 100 feet out from the fireworks display
vessel during the loading and staging of the display in Sausalito, CA.
Between 8:30 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. on August 8, 2022, the safety zone will
expand to all navigable waters, from surface to bottom, within a circle
formed by connecting all points 600 feet out from the display vessel in
approximate position 37[deg]50'12'' N, 122[deg]28'01'' W (NAD 83) or as
announced via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, ``designated
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast
Guard vessel, or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or
assisting the Captain of the Port San Francisco (COTP) in the
enforcement of the safety zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the COTP or the COTP's designated representative to
obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter
or operate in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or
directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative. Persons and vessels may request permission to enter the
safety zone on VHF-23A or through the 24-hour Command Center at
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 6:30
p.m. until 9:30 p.m. on August 8, 2022.
    (e) Information broadcasts. The COTP or the COTP's designated
representative will notify the maritime community of periods during
which this zone will be enforced, in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7.

    Dated: July 28, 2022.
Jordan M. Baldueza,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Alternate Captain of the Port, San
Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2022-16531 Filed 8-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


Meeting Time /Date /Location
Date
9/6/2017
Time/Location
11:00am  -  12:00 pm (EST)
Dial In
1-855-564-1700, Conference Extension:  1107547, Code: 234567

Agenda
Introductions
Previous Meeting with SI on 2,4,6-TTBP
Existing uses
Recycling, waste, recovery
Imports and imported articles
Critical uses
Available substitutes
Next steps and follow up

Meeting Attendees:
SI Group:
Kevin Kransler
Peter Miranda
Peter Vanderhook
Cary Mavean

EPA:
Todd Coleman, OPPT
Doug Parsons, CCD
Erik Winchester, OPPT
Peter Gimlin, OPPT
Stephanie Suazo, Chemistry Economics and Sustainable Strategies Division

Previous Meeting with SI on 2,4,6-TTBP:
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: SI Group would like to reestablish a communication channel with EPA. We would like to get more information on how the assessment for TTBP will likely occur, what type of information SI Group can provide, and how that information can be passed along. It may be useful to start with a discussion of the roles and responsibilities.
Doug Parsons, EPA: As an overview, EPA released the use documents in early August, which are now open for public comment. EPA would like people to submit use and exposure information as well. The docket is open until December 9, 2017. EPA would like to know if there are any errors, incomplete information, or missing uses or exposure scenarios. This information is useful as EPA continues the exposure assessments for these compounds.
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: How will EPA utilize this use and exposure information? Will the data be incorporated into exposure models?
Doug Parsons, EPA: This is the first time EPA has done this, so risk evaluations for these PBT chemicals are not required. The standard EPA must meet is to reduce exposures to the extent practicable. Section 6(h) of TSCA requires EPA to determine the exposure under the conditions of use, either to the general population, susceptible subpopulations, or the environment. To do this, EPA is starting with the use documents to figure out what the exposures are and whether there are exposures under these very specific conditions of use that EPA has identified. The next step will be to conduct an exposure assessment and put it out for public review and comment. That might not occur until the proposed rule is done, which is set for June 2019.
Todd Coleman, EPA: That is a good overview of the key steps of the process. Of course, there are a variety of paths to get to the point of understanding exposures.
Erik Winchester, EPA: The more information EPA has, the more certain we are about what we are doing, and the more certain the information is that is being provided to the public. EPA seeks ways to reduce the uncertainty in our understanding of exposure, which is why EPA is always asking for data on exposure or documentation that there is no exposure.
Doug Parsons, EPA: During my career at EPA, I have done a lot of work on pesticides in food and residential exposure assessments for pesticides. Sometimes through that process, EPA would come out with its best estimate of what the exposure might be, and then the companies would do the same. Or, before EPA came up with the assessment, the companies would gather exposure information to figure out what the exposures were. This exposure information really helps EPA tailor restrictions on the pesticides. As Erik said, the exposure information results in much more realistic regulations, if that is what is needed in the process. Following the chemical throughout the process will help to really understand what and where the exposures are.
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: This is valuable feedback and helps define the type of data to gather. SI Group is interested in being a willing stakeholder. Is there a method to submit confidential information to the public docket?
Doug Parsons, EPA: In the Federal Register notice, there are guidelines on how to submit information as Confidential Business Information (CBI).
Todd Coleman, EPA: The information can be found in the memo of the Federal Register notice. If the information is CBI, we encourage you not to hesitate to send it. There are procedures for submitting CBI, and the information is still very useful to what EPA is doing.
Cary Mavean, SI Group: Are there other ways EPA is gathering information on TTBP? Are there other companies EPA is reaching out to?
Doug Parsons, EPA: EPA talked to Afton Chemical, the Department of Defense, NASA, and other federal partners like OSHA, NIOSH, and CPSC. DoD has interest in this chemical and has identified some uses. They have been asked to go through their supply chain again. EPA welcomes additional contacts to reach out to if SI Group has suggestions.
Cary Mavean, SI Group: SI Group has started reaching out to its customers, gathering some information, and verifying uses. We have been doing our own analyses of exposure as we both use and manufacture the substance. We are putting this together and can provide the information to EPA.
Doug Parsons, EPA: That would be very useful.
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: In November 2016, SI Group visited EPA to discuss TTBP, providing some basic information on the manufacture of TTBP. Is this information available to the team now? I believe we left sanitized information.
Cary Mavean, SI Group: The information never made it into the docket. Should any information provided from this point be submitted into the docket?
Doug Parsons, EPA: Yes, it would be best to resubmit that information. The team has evolved on these TTBP chemicals.
Peter Gimlin, EPA: There are a lot of people involved in this project, for the 5 PBT chemicals and the other first 10 chemicals. There are people from two divisions and economists supporting this work. Todd Coleman and I have been working on TTBP. Erik Winchester is our immediate supervisor. Cindy Wheeler will be making the general presentation for the webinar, and Doug Parsons has been working on coordinating all the work.
Doug Parsons, EPA: Stephanie Suazo is also on the line, as our economist.
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: This is very helpful. SI Group has had our own internal shuffling as well. We appreciate the time today in helping us understand the process and learn how to be a good partner.
Doug Parsons, EPA: It may be useful to mention what we are doing for the first 10 chemicals, as it may spill into this. For these chemicals, EPA completed use documents in February, scoping documents in June, and now EPA is in the process of doing problem formulation. This essentially scopes out exactly which uses will undergo risk evaluations. Through this process, EPA is trying to better understand what other statutes, like the Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and other environmental laws, may regulate these chemicals. It may be useful for SI Group to start looking at what other environmental laws are regulating TTBP as well.
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: That is a good comment.
Existing Uses:
Todd Coleman, EPA: SI Group took over the manufacture of the chemical for Albemarle, correct? SI Group and Albemarle both reported in 2012, but in 2016, only SI Group reported.
Cary Mavean, SI Group: Yes, that is correct.
Todd Coleman, EPA: Is there any more guidance on which customers are sourcing this chemical directly from SI Group? Is there any idea if and when this data is going to be made available?
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: SI Group will provide this information to EPA as it becomes available. We are still gathering information on customers and use conditions.
Cary Mavean, SI Group: SI Group is working on how to best present the confidential information and provide it to EPA. We have reached out to our customers.
Todd Coleman, EPA: In the use document, fuel additives and lubricants have been identified. Is SI Group aware of anything else TTBP is being integrated into, based on what you know about your downstream entities?
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: SI Group is not aware of any other uses.
Recycling, Waste, Recovery:
Doug Parsons, EPA: The uptick in the CDR information is because SI Group took over Albemarle's volume, correct?
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: Yes.
Doug Parsons, EPA: So, the poundage every year isn't really going up; it is pretty stable.
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: Comparing 2012 and 2016 CDR data, the numbers are similar. It may be useful to point out that, while we are still looking through the data, a significant portion of the chemical is recovered through our processes.
Todd Coleman, EPA: EPA would like information on how much is recovered in the process and what happens to it, whether it is recycled, turned into something else, used as a reactant, etc.
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: Understood.
Imports and Imported Articles:
Todd Coleman, EPA: Does SI Group import or export? Do you foresee any changes to this?
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: I think there is some export, but there is no import.
Critical Uses:
Todd Coleman, EPA: Is SI Group aware of any critical uses in commerce or anything that cannot be replaced?
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: The DoD uses may be an example.
Doug Parsons, EPA: Section 6(g) in TSCA allows critical uses. These uses of TTBP are regulated under Section 6(h). Section 6(g) is a way the agency can give exemptions for critical or essential uses. It also includes the defense waiver. It would be useful for SI Group to look at this. So, are there any critical uses other than the ones DoD would identify?
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: SI Group is also aware of commercial operations in jet fuel. So, commercial airlines would be another use.
Todd Coleman, EPA: Afton Chemical also mentioned commercial airlines. EPA is also looking into its uses in antioxidants. It sounds like TTBP is mainly in the fuel and fuel additive market.
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: Yes, it is a pretty small market.
Todd Coleman, EPA: Environment Canada, European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), Japan, and Australia have all done some work on this. Has SI Group worked with any of these governments in trying to develop their chemical regulation programs?
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: SI Group had some interaction with Environment Canada when they were developing the SNAc (Significant New Activity) back in 2011. There was some correspondence between Albemarle and Japan. We are not sure of any interaction with Australia.
Cary Mavean, SI Group: Europe is just starting their review, so that will be starting next year.
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: Right. They are probably a year behind where EPA would be.
Doug Parsons, EPA: On the initial 10 chemicals, EPA did outreach with Environment Canada and ECHA. EPA will likely do more international outreach with all the PBTs at some point.
Todd Coleman, EPA: The only reported use in the 2016 CDR was as an intermediate in all other basic organic chemical manufacturing. EPA did not find a lot of publicly available information about the chemicals used as an intermediate in basic organic chemical manufacturing or the plastics and resin industry. The plastics and resin industry use was reported in 2012 but not in 2016.
SI Group: SI Group cannot attest to the 2012 CDR information provided by Albemarle. With respect to the use of this chemical intermediate, SI Group is now developing more specific data. TTBP is recycled back into the processing stream. Greater than 95% goes back in for reconversion into a mono-substituted phenol. It is intentionally re-equilibrated and some of the butyl groups are removed. These are relatively volatile materials.
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: A more simple answer is that SI Group is coming up with a manufacturing process, which will be part of the information provided to EPA.
Doug Parsons, EPA: For some other PBT chemicals, companies have provided flowcharts on the manufacturing process.
Stephanie Suazo, EPA: EPA would like to have information on uses and downstream processers for which TTBP is used as an intermediate.
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: We will look into that.
Available Substitutes:
Todd Coleman, EPA: Is SI Group aware of any direct substitutes for TTBP? I know it is spec'd into a lot of standards as fuel additives and antioxidants.
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: SI Group is unaware of any substitutes.
Doug Parsons, EPA: The chemicals are put in the fuel at the refining facility, then shipped, and then burned. Is this correct?
SI Group: The chemical may not be put in at the refining facility. It is more likely put in at a terminal location.
Doug Parsons, EPA: Has anyone done any emissions testing to see if the chemicals are destroyed in the combustion process and if there are any environmental releases?
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: SI Group will have to look into that. Environment Canada may have some data on this, as they did an assessment 6-7 years ago.
Doug Parsons, EPA: EPA will contact Environment Canada, and we can share the information with SI Group as well if it is useful.
Next steps and follow-up:
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: EPA has provided some great questions. SI Group will try to address them in our submissions to the docket. Please reach out to me if there are any other questions.
Doug Parsons, EPA: This is the first group of chemicals EPA has done this way, where risk evaluations are not needed. It is a learning process for everyone.
Peter Gimlin, EPA: Are any of you intending to make comments at the webinar tomorrow?
Kevin Kransler, SI Group: We will be listening tomorrow. That is why we wanted to have this call, to reintroduce ourselves and get reestablished with what you are looking for and how we can be a good partner.
Doug Parsons, EPA: We appreciate that. Thank you all.


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 198 (Friday, October 12, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62289-62290]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25103]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67998; File No. SR-ICEEU-2012-07]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Europe Limited; Notice
of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed Rule
Change To Revise CDS Procedures Related to Clearing Certainty
Requirements

October 5, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on September 25, 2012, ICE Clear Europe Limited (``ICE Clear Europe'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the
proposed rule change described in Items I and II below, which items
have been prepared primarily by ICE Clear Europe. The Commission is
publishing this Notice and Order to solicit comments on the proposed
rule change from interested persons and to approve the proposed rule
change on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change

    ICE Clear Europe is in regular communication with representatives
of its Clearing Members, as that term is defined in the CDS Procedures
of ICE Clear Europe (the ``CDS Procedures'') in relation to the
operation of clearing processes and arrangements. The purpose of the
proposed rule changes is to implement in its CDS Procedures new
clearing certainty requirements under Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (``CFTC'') Rules 39.12(b)(7) and 1.74(b), which become
effective on October 1, 2012. All capitalized terms not defined herein
are defined in the CDS Procedures.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, ICE Clear Europe included
statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule
change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule
change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places
specified in Item III below. ICE Clear Europe has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    As noted above, the principal purpose of the proposed procedure
amendments is to update the particular characteristics of the CDS
Procedures applicable to the clearing of CDS Contracts. Specifically,
the proposed rule changes affect Part 4 of the CDS Procedures by
addressing the timeframe under which trades must be accepted or
rejected for clearing under new CFTC rules and adding certain
clarifying language around the weekly CDS clearing cycle. Each of these
changes is described in detail as follows.
    Paragraph 4.4(b) and 4.5 of the CDS Procedures will be revised to
clarify the acceptance timing and procedures for the weekly CDS
clearing cycle in light of the new clearing certainty requirements
under CFTC rules.
    Under paragraph 4.19 of the revised CDS Procedures, ICE Clear
Europe will incorporate new CFTC Rule 39.12(b)(7)(ii), which requires,
among other things, that ICE Clear Europe accept or reject trades
submitted for clearance that are executed competitively on or subject
to the rules of a designated contract market or swap execution facility
(or similar facility) as soon after execution as would be
technologically practicable if fully automated systems were used.
    Under paragraph 4.20 of the revised CDS Procedures, ICE Clear
Europe will incorporate new CFTC Rule 39.12(b)(7)(iii), which requires,
among other things, that ICE Clear Europe accept or reject trades
submitted for clearance that are not executed competitively on or
subject to the rules of a designated contract market or swap execution
facility (or similar facility) as soon after submission for clearing
would be technologically practicable if fully automated systems were
used.
    Finally, under paragraph 4.21 of the revised CDS Procedures, ICE
Clear Europe will implement the standards of CFTC Rule 1.74(b) that
require Clearing Members to accept or reject each Trade submitted by or
for the Clearing Member as quickly as would be technologically
practicable if fully automated systems were used. Clearing Members
would

also be required to submit such Trades to ICE Clear Europe following
such acceptance as quickly as would be practicable if fully automated
systems were used.
    ICE Clear Europe believes that the proposed rule changes are
consistent with the purposes and requirements of Section 17A of the Act
and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to it. ICE Clear
Europe believes that implementing the CFTC's clearing certainty
requirements will comply with the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    ICE Clear Europe does not believe that the proposed rule change
will have any impact or impose any burden on competition.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    ICE Clear Europe has not solicited and does not intend to solicit
comments regarding this proposed rule change. ICE Clear Europe has not
received any unsolicited written comments from interested parties.

III. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
     Electronic comments may be submitted by using the
Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml), or send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-ICEEU-2012-07 on the subject line.
     Paper comments should be sent in triplicate to Elizabeth
M. Murphy, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICEEU-2012-07. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of ICE Clear Europe
and on ICE Clear Europe's Web site at https://www.theice.com/notices/Notices.shtml. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
ICEEU-2012-07 and should be submitted on or before November 2, 2012.

IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
Proposed Rule Change

    Section 19(b) of the Act \3\ directs the Commission to approve a
proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that
such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such
organization. The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the requirements of the Act, in particular the
requirements of Section 17A of the Act, and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to ICE Clear Europe.\4\ Specifically, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act which requires, among other things,
that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt
and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions
because the proposed rule change should allow ICE Clear Europe to
incorporate into its CDS Procedures language that articulates the time
frame in which trades must be accepted or rejected under new CFTC
rules.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1. In approving this proposed rule change, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its filing, ICE Clear Europe requested that the Commission
approve this proposed rule change on an accelerated basis for good
cause shown. ICE Clear Europe cites as the reason for this request ICE
Clear Europe's operation as a DCO, which is subject to regulation by
the CFTC under the CEA. The Commission finds good cause for approving
the proposed rule change prior to the 30th day after the date of
publication of notice in the Federal Register because the proposed rule
change allows ICE Clear Europe to implement the regulations of another
federal regulatory agency, the CFTC, in accordance with those
regulations' effective date.

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (SR-ICEEU-2012-07) is approved on an
accelerated basis.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-25103 Filed 10-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 143 (Thursday, July 29, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40851-40853]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16175]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2021-D-0519]

Rabies: Developing Monoclonal Antibody Cocktails for the Passive
Immunization Component of Post-Exposure Prophylaxis; Draft Guidance for
Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled ``Rabies:
Developing Monoclonal Antibody Cocktails for the Passive Immunization
Component of Post-Exposure Prophylaxis.'' The purpose of this draft
guidance is to help sponsors in the development of anti-rabies virus
monoclonal antibody (mAb) cocktails as an alternative to anti-rabies
virus immunoglobulin (RIG) as the passive immunization component of
post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for the prevention of rabies when given
immediately after contact with a rabid or possibly rabid animal.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by September 27, 2021 to ensure that the Agency considers your
comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final
version of the guidance.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as
follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2021-D-0519 for ``Rabies: Developing Monoclonal Antibody Cocktails
for the Passive Immunization Component of Post-Exposure Prophylaxis.''
Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those
submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to
the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave.,
Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one
self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your
requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the draft guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Troy, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 6381, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-
402-4656.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry
entitled ``Rabies: Developing Monoclonal Antibody Cocktails for the
Passive Immunization Component of Post-Exposure Prophylaxis.'' The
purpose of this draft guidance is to help sponsors in the development
of anti-rabies virus mAb cocktails as an alternative to RIG as the
passive immunization component of PEP for the prevention of rabies when
given immediately after contact with a rabid or possibly rabid animal.
Because of the unique complexities of drug development in this area,
extensive discussion with multiple stakeholders has taken place,
including a public workshop in 2017 and an advisory committee meeting
in 2019. These discussions helped FDA formulate the considerations for
rabies mAb cocktail development that are described in this draft
guidance.
    The draft guidance addresses the following topics:
     Considerations when selecting the mAbs included in the
cocktail
     The nonclinical and clinical data needed to support
clinical trials of the mAb cocktail in potentially rabies virus-exposed
subjects
     The clinical data recommended to support an initial
biologics license application submission of the mAb cocktail for a
second-line indication in situations where human-derived RIG is not
available
     The clinical data recommended to support a first-line
indication for the mAb cocktail
    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on ``Rabies:
Developing Monoclonal

Antibody Cocktails for the Passive Immunization Component of Post-
Exposure Prophylaxis.'' It does not establish any rights for any person
and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative
approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes
and regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does
refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. Therefore,
clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not
required for this guidance. The previously approved collections of
information are subject to review by OMB under the PRA. The collections
of information associated with submissions of content and format of
labeling for drugs and biologics in 21 CFR 201.56 and 201.57 have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0572; the collections of
information associated with submissions of investigational new drug
applications in 21 CFR part 312 have been approved under OMB control
numbers 0910-0014; the collections of information associated with
submissions of applications for approval to market a new drug in 21 CFR
part 314 have been approved under 0910-0001; the collections of
information associated with the reporting and recordkeeping of
postmarketing adverse drug experiences have been approved under OMB
control numbers 0910-0001, 0910-0230, 0910-0291, and 0910-0645; and the
collections of information associated with general licensing provisions
for biologics in 21 CFR part 601 have been approved under OMB control
number 0910-0338.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance
at https://www.fda.gov/drugs/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information/guidances-drugs, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents, or https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: July 26, 2021.
Lauren K. Roth,
Acting Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-16175 Filed 7-28-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 53 (Monday, March 22, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15149-15151]
[FR Doc No: 2021-05352]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0183; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-01408-T]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited
(Type Certificate Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-400
series airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report that a
number of nacelle A-frames were not manufactured in accordance with
engineering drawings. This proposed AD would require, depending on
airplane configuration, removing the fasteners on the nacelle A-frame
side brace sub-assemblies, doing an eddy current inspection for
cracking, cold-working the holes, installing oversize fasteners, re-
identifying the reworked side brace fitting and A-frame, and repair if
necessary. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 6,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact De
Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited, Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123
Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone 416-375-
4000; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet https://dehavilland.com. You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South
216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0183; 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 NPRM, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrea Jimenez, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 516-
794-5531; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0183; Project Identifier
MCAI-2020-01408-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
the proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this proposed AD.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Andrea Jimenez, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Section,
FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 516-794-

5531; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any commentary that the FAA
receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in
the public docket for this rulemaking.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued TCCA AD CF-2020-39, dated October 14,
2020 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
Information, or the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for certain
De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-400 series
airplanes. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2021-0183.
    This proposed AD was prompted by a report that a number of nacelle
A-frames were not manufactured in accordance with engineering drawings.
The holes in the side brace sub-assemblies were not cold-worked as
required. As a result the side brace fitting might not meet its fatigue
life, and cracking of the A-frame bottom flange may result. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address possible cracking of the A-frame. This
condition, if not addressed, may lead to collapse of the main landing
gear (MLG). See the MCAI for additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited has issued Service Bulletin
84-54-32, dated October 10, 2019. This service information describes
procedures, depending on airplane configuration, for removing the
fasteners on the nacelle A-frame side brace sub-assemblies, doing an
eddy current inspection for cracking, cold-working the holes,
installing oversize fasteners, and re-identifying the reworked side
brace fitting and A-frame.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to the FAA's bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority,
the FAA has been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI
and service information referenced above. The FAA is proposing this AD
because the FAA evaluated all the relevant information and determined
the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop
on other products of the same type design.

Proposed Requirements of This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information described previously. This proposed AD would
also require repairing any crack found during an eddy current
inspection.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 41 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 work-hours x $85 per hour = $1,275........................            $254           $1,529          $62,689
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would 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 Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 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:

De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (Type Certificate Previously
Held by Bombardier, Inc.): Docket No. FAA-2021-0183; Project
Identifier MCAI-2020-01408-T.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) action by May 6, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (type
certificate previously held by Bombardier, Inc.) Model DHC-8-400, -
401, and -402 airplanes,

certificated in any category, serial numbers 4081 through 4591
inclusive.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report that a number of nacelle A-
frames were not manufactured in accordance with engineering
drawings. The holes in the side brace sub-assemblies were not cold-
worked as required. As a result the side brace fitting might not
meet its fatigue life, and cracking of the A-frame bottom flange may
result. The FAA is issuing this AD to address possible cracking of
the A-frame. This condition, if not addressed, may lead to collapse
of the main landing gear (MLG).

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    (1) Within the compliance time specified in paragraph (g)(2) of
this AD, do the applicable actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i)
and (ii) of this AD.
    (i) For airplanes having serial numbers 4081 through 4582
inclusive: Remove the fasteners on the nacelle A-frame side brace
sub-assemblies, do an eddy current inspection for cracking on
airplanes having 30,000 total flight cycles or more, cold-work the
holes, and install oversize fasteners, in accordance with Part A of
paragraph 3.B. of the Accomplishment Instructions of De Havilland
Aircraft of Canada Limited Service Bulletin 84-54-32, dated October
10, 2019. If any cracking is found, before further flight, repair
the cracking using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or De
Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited's TCCA Design Approval
Organization (DAO). If approved by the DAO, the approval must
include the DAO-authorized signature.
    (ii) For all airplanes: Re-identify the reworked side brace
fitting and A-frame, in accordance with Part B of paragraph 3.B. of
the Accomplishment Instructions of De Havilland Aircraft of Canada
Limited Service Bulletin 84-54-32, dated October 10, 2019.
    (2) At the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs
(g)(2)(i) and (ii) of this AD, do the applicable actions specified
in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.
    (i) Within 48 months or 8,000 flight hours after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first.
    (ii) At the later of the times specified in paragraphs
(g)(2)(ii)(A) and (B) of this AD.
    (A) Before accumulating 40,000 total flight cycles.
    (B) Within 12 months or 1,290 flight cycles after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first.

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In
accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal
inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as appropriate. If
sending information directly to the manager of the certification
office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or TCCA; or De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited's
TCCA DAO. If approved by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-
authorized signature.

(i) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) TCCA AD CF-2020-39, dated October 14, 2020, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2021-0183.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Andrea Jimenez,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York
ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact De
Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited, Q-Series Technical Help Desk,
123 Garratt Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone
416-375-4000; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet
https://dehavilland.com. You may view this service information at
the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch,
2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on March 10, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-05352 Filed 3-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment: Dear Mr. Zeller:

I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I might want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. Quite simply, I firmly believe that they saved my life. I smoked for 48 years and attempted to "quit" several times without success.  I have been off tobacco for 2 years as of 01/07/2014.  Personally I've been vaping for approximately 7 years having tried all early types and styles including several of the cartridge e-cigs with out being satisfied.  Until I was able to use the larger adjustable battery I would still smoke tobacco cigaretts.  Please consider this as I would hate to return to that pattern.  My health has improved and my VA doctors are extremely happy.    I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 183 (Friday, September 22, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65314-65315]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20450]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2023-0456; Airspace Docket No. 23-ASW-3]
RIN 2120-AA66

Establishment of Area Navigation (RNAV) Routes T-469 and T-472;
Southwest United States

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Area Navigation (RNAV) routes T-469
and T-472 in the southwest United States. The new RNAV routes expand
the availability of the enroute structure and provide additional RNAV
routing within the National Airspace System (NAS) in support of
transitioning it from ground-based to satellite-based navigation.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, November 30, 2023. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11
and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), all
comments received, this final rule, and all background material may be
viewed online at www.regulations.gov using the FAA Docket number.
Electronic retrieval help and guidelines are available on the website.
It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11H, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. You may also contact the Rules and
Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it modifies the enroute structure as necessary to preserve
the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace
System (NAS).

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking for Docket No.
FAA-2023-0456 in the Federal Register (88 FR 13742; March 6, 2023),
proposing to establish RNAV routes T-469 and T-472 in the southwest
United States to expand the availability of the enroute structure and
provide additional RNAV routing within the NAS. Interested parties were
invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written
comments on the proposal. No comments were received.

Incorporation by Reference

    United States Area Navigation Routes (T-routes) are published in
paragraph 6011 of FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 on
an annual basis. This document amends the current version of that
order, FAA Order JO 7400.11H, dated August 11, 2023, and effective
September 15, 2023. FAA Order JO 7400.11H is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. These amendments will
be published in the next update to FAA Order JO 7400.11.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11H lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas,
air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by establishing RNAV routes T-469
and T-472. The new RNAV routes are described below.
    T-469: T-469 is established and extends between the TASEY, TX,
waypoint (WP) (located 60 feet west of the Paris, TX, Very High
Frequency (VHF) Omnidirectional Range (VOR)/Distance Measuring
Equipment (VOR/DME) navigational aid (NAVAID)) and the Rich Mountain,
OK, VOR/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC) NAVAID. This new T-route
provides RNAV routing along the same route of flight as VOR Federal
airway V-315 and

enhances flight safety and NAS efficiency for aircraft transiting
enroute along the eastern boundary of the Rivers Military Operations
Area (MOA).
    T-472: T-472 is established and extends between the TASEY, TX, WP
(located 60 feet west of the Paris, TX, VOR/DME NAVAID) and the Hot
Springs, AR, VOR/DME NAVAID. This new T-route provides RNAV routing
along the same route of flight as VOR Federal airway V-124 and enhances
flight safety and NAS efficiency for aircraft transiting enroute along
the southern boundary of the Hog B MOA.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action of establishing RNAV routes
T-469 and T-472 in the southwest United States to provide additional
RNAV routing within the NAS qualifies for categorical exclusion under
the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its
implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with
FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,
paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further
environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify
classes of airspace areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see
14 CFR part 71, Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas;
Air Traffic Service Routes; and Reporting Points); and paragraph 5-
6.5i, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact
review the establishment of new or revised air traffic control
procedures conducted at 3,000 feet or more above ground level (AGL);
procedures conducted below 3,000 feet AGL that do not cause traffic to
be routinely routed over noise sensitive areas; modifications to
currently approved procedures conducted below 3,000 feet AGL that do
not significantly increase noise over noise sensitive areas; and
increases in minimum altitudes and landing minima. As such, this action
is not expected to result in any potentially significant environmental
impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding
Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for
factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded
action may have a significant environmental impact requiring further
analysis. The FAA has determined that no extraordinary circumstances
exist that warrant preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact study.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11H, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 11,
2023, and effective September 15, 2023, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6011 United States Area Navigation Routes.

* * * * *

T-469 TASEY, TX to Rich Mountain, OK (PGO) [New]

TASEY, TX                                       WP                             (Lat. 33[deg]32'32.56`` N, long. 095[deg]26'54.55`` W)
Rich Mountain, OK (PGO)                         VORTAC                         (Lat. 34[deg]40'49.67`` N, long. 094[deg]36'32.41`` W)

                                                                      * * * * * * *
T-472 TASEY, TX to Hot Springs, AR (HOT) [New]

TASEY, TX                                       WP                             (Lat. 33[deg]32'32.56'' N, long. 095[deg]26'54.55'' W)
Hot Springs, AR (HOT)                           VOR/DME                        (Lat. 34[deg]28'42.94'' N, long. 093[deg]05'26.20'' W)

* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 18, 2023.
Karen L. Chiodini,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2023-20450 Filed 9-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P