[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 16, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31300-31302]
[FR Doc No: 2023-10405]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0040]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of a New Approval of Information Collection: Compliance and
Enforcement Actions (CEA) & Voluntary Disclosure Report (VDR)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)

approval for a new information collection. The Federal Register Notice
with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on the following
collection of information was published on October 03, 2022. The
collection involves Regulated Entity (RE) users that create and submit
Compliance and Enforcement Action (CE) activity and Voluntary
Disclosure Report (VDR) submittals to the FAA. The FAA enters and
processes this activity and submittals using the Aviation Safety
Knowledge Management Environment Compliance and Enforcement Actions
(ASKME CEA) application. The information to be collected will be used
to support processing CE and VDR processing for ASKME CEA application
users and is necessary because it automates the process by which REs
may disclose to the FAA potential occurrence of noncompliance to
requirements.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by June 15, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of
this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--
Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ernie Billingsley by email at:
[email protected]; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-XXXX.
    Title: Compliance and Enforcement Actions (CEA) & Voluntary
Disclosure Report (VDR).
    Form Numbers: There is no standard form to use for CEA and VDR
submissions.
    Type of Review: A new information collection.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collection of information
was published on October 03, 2022 (FR Citation 2022-21373). The CEA
system supports ASKME users. ASKME users are AIR employees who perform
oversight activities of design and manufacturing regulated entities,
including production approval holders, design approval holders, and
organizational designation authorization holders. REs such as
manufacturers, delegated organizations (Organization Designation
Authorization) and design holders regulated by the FAA will communicate
and exchange information with the FAA. The ASKME CEA is an internal
web-based application and provides an more efficient process for CE and
VDR activity received from manufacturers, delegated organizations and
design holders.

Compliance and Enforcement Actions (CEA)

    Title 49 United States Code, Subtitle VII--Aviation Programs
encourages the development of civil aeronautics, and promotes safety in
air commerce. Sections 44709, 44711 and 44736 allow the Department of
Transportation or the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) to re-inspect and perform oversight activities for
civil aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, design
organization, production certificate holder, and Organization
Designation Authorizations. An Organization Designation Authorization
or ``ODA'' is an authorization by the FAA under section 44702(d) for an
organization composed of 1 or more ODA units to perform approved
functions on behalf of the FAA. See 49 U.S.C. 44736
    Section 44709 allows the FAA to re-inspect at any time a civil
aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, design organization,
production certificate holder, air navigation facility, or air agency,
or reexamine an airman holding a certificate issued under 49 U.S.C.
44703.
    Section 44711 prohibitions a person from violating a term of an air
agency, design organization certificate, or production certificate or a
regulation prescribed or order issued under section 44701(a) or (b) or
any of sections 44702-44716 related to the holder of the certificate;
    Under section 44736, when overseeing an ODA holder, the
Administrator of the FAA shall conduct regular oversight activities by
inspecting the ODA holder's delegated functions and taking action based
on validated inspection findings. When the FAA officials perform
section 44709 re-inspection or oversight activities and discovers
violations, they process them using FAA Orders 8000.373B, Federal
Aviation Administration Compliance Program, 2150.3C, FAA Compliance and
Enforcement Program and AIR-002-035 Aircraft Certification Service
(AIR) Compliance and Enforcement Process.

Voluntary Disclosure Report (VDR)

    Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 193 of the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations provides that certain
information submitted to the FAA on a voluntary basis is not to be
disclosed. This part implements statutory provision 49 U.S.C. 40123.
The purpose of Part 193 is to encourage the aviation community to
voluntarily share information with the FAA so that the agency may work
cooperatively with industry to identify modifications to rules,
policies, and procedures needed to improve safety, security, and
efficiency of the National Airspace System. The information collection
associated with Part 193 also supports the Department of
Transportation's Strategic Goal of Safety and Security.
    To encourage people to voluntarily submit desired information,
Sec.  40123 was added to Title 49, United States Code, in the Federal
Aviation Reauthorization Act of 1996. Section 40123 allows the
Administrator, through FAA regulations, to protect from disclosure
voluntarily provided information relating to safety and security
issues.
    The White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security issued a
recommendation \i\ on this subject. In Recommendation 1.8, the
Commission noted that the most effective way to identify problems is
for the people who operate the system to self-disclose the information,
but that people will not provide information to the FAA unless it can
be protected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \i\ https://www.hsdl.org/?abstract&did=1839.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FAA programs that are covered under Part 193 are the Voluntary
Safety Reporting Programs (FAA Order 7200.20), Air Traffic and
Technical Operations Safety Action Programs (FAA Order 7200.22), Flight
Operational Quality Assurance (FAA Order 8000.81), Aviation Safety
Action Program (FAA Order 8000.82), and Voluntary Disclosure Reporting
Program (FAA Order 8000.89). The AIR ASKME CEA application supports the
electronic processing of the three main compliance and enforcement
actions as defined by FAA Order 2150.3C, Compliance and Enforcement
Program. These actions are Voluntary Disclosure Reports, Compliance
Actions and Enforcement Actions.
    Respondents: Respondents are aviation design and manufacturing
regulated entities, including production

approval holders, design approval holders, and organizational
designation authorization holders. Responding to the collection of data
is voluntary and will be respond to actions in writing and processed by
the FAA through the ASKME CEA application. FAA staff of AIR including
Aviation Safety Inspectors (ASIs), Aviation Safety Engineers (ASEs),
their supervisors and managers, and Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) Organization Management Team (OMT) members receive
information submitted by the regulated entities.
    Frequency: As needed.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: These reports require an
average of 17 hour each to prepare.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: The total estimated burden hours
based on the average Compliance and Enforcement/VDR closed cases
activity from the CEA & Boeing Aviation Safety Oversight Office (BASSO)
databases annually is 6048.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 9, 2023.
Ernie Billingsley,
Business Program Manager, AIR-952, Enterprise Business Operations
Division and Technology Systems Services Branch.
[FR Doc. 2023-10405 Filed 5-15-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 147 (Monday, August 1, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50330-50336]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17789]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 51

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0041; FRL-9949-77-OAR]
RIN 2060-AR94

Air Quality: Revision to the Regulatory Definition of Volatile
Organic Compounds--Exclusion of 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-
trifluoroethoxy) Ethane (HFE-347pcf2)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to revise the regulatory definition of volatile organic
compounds (VOC) under the Clean Air Act (CAA). This direct final action
adds 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy) ethane (also known
as HFE-347pcf2; CAS number 406-78-0) to the list of compounds excluded
from the regulatory definition of VOC on the basis that this compound
makes a negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone (O3)
formation.

DATES: This rule is effective on September 30, 2016 without further
notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by August 31, 2016. If
the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2015-0041, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Souad Benromdhane, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Health and Environmental Impacts
Division, Mail Code C539-07, Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: (919)
541-5315; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?
II. Does this action apply to me?
III. Background
    A. The EPA's VOC Exemption Policy
    B. Petition To List HFE-347pcf2 as an Exempt Compound
IV. The EPA's Assessment of the Petition
    A. Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone Formation
    B. Contribution to Stratospheric Ozone Depletion
    C. Toxicity
    D. Contribution to Climate Change
    E. Conclusions
V. Direct Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
    L. Judicial Review

I. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?

    The EPA is publishing this direct final rule without a prior
proposed rule because we view this as a noncontroversial action and
anticipate no adverse comment. This action revises the EPA's regulatory
definition of VOC for purposes of preparing state implementation plans
(SIPs) to attain the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for
O3 under title I of the CAA by adding HFE-347pcf2 to the
list of compounds excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC on the
basis that this compound makes a negligible contribution to
tropospheric O3 formation. However, in the ``Proposed
Rules'' section of this Federal Register, we are publishing a separate
document that will serve as the proposed rule to make this revision to
the regulatory definition of VOC if adverse comments are received on
this direct final rule. We will not institute a second comment period
on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this
time. For further information about commenting on this rule, see the
ADDRESSES section of this document.
    If the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this
direct final rule will not take effect. We would address all public
comments in any subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule.

II. Does this action apply to me?

    Entities potentially affected by this direct final rule include,
but are not necessarily limited to: State and local air pollution
control agencies that adopt and implement regulations to control air
emissions of VOC; and industries manufacturing and/or using HFE-347pcf2
as a precision cleaning agent to remove contaminants including oil,
flux, and fingerprints from items like medical devices, artificial
implants, crucial military and aerospace items, electric components,
printed circuit boards, optics, jewelry, ball bearings, aircraft
guidance systems, film, relays, and a variety of metal components,
among others.

III. Background

A. The EPA's VOC Exemption Policy

    Tropospheric O3, commonly known as smog, is formed when
VOC and nitrogen oxides (NOX) react in the atmosphere in the
presence of sunlight. Because of the harmful health effects of
O3, the EPA and state governments limit the amount of VOC
that can be released into the atmosphere. Volatile organic compounds
form O3 through atmospheric photochemical reactions, and
different VOC have different levels of reactivity. That is, different
VOC do not react to form O3 at the same speed or do not form
O3 to the same extent. Some VOC react slowly or form less
O3; therefore, changes in their emissions have limited
effects on local or regional O3 pollution episodes. It is
the EPA's policy that organic compounds with a negligible level of
reactivity should be excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC in
order to focus VOC control efforts on compounds that significantly
increase O3 concentrations. The EPA also believes that
exempting such compounds creates an incentive for industry to use
negligibly reactive compounds in place of more highly reactive
compounds that are regulated as VOC. The EPA lists compounds that it
has determined to be negligibly reactive in its regulations as being
excluded from the regulatory definition of VOC (40 CFR 51.100(s)).
    The CAA requires the regulation of VOC for various purposes.
Section 302(s) of the CAA specifies that the EPA has the authority to
define the meaning of ``VOC'' and, hence, what compounds shall be
treated as VOC for regulatory purposes. The policy of excluding
negligibly reactive compounds from the regulatory definition of VOC was
first laid out in the ``Recommended Policy on Control of Volatile
Organic Compounds'' (42 FR 35314, July 8, 1977) (from here forward
referred to as the 1977 Recommended Policy) and was supplemented
subsequently with the ``Interim Guidance on Control of Volatile Organic
Compounds in Ozone State Implementation Plans'' (70 FR 54046, September
13, 2005) (from here forward referred to as the 2005 Interim Guidance).
The EPA uses the reactivity of ethane as the threshold for determining
whether a compound has negligible reactivity. Compounds that are less
reactive than, or equally reactive to, ethane under certain assumed
conditions may be deemed negligibly reactive and, therefore, suitable
for exemption from the regulatory definition of VOC. Compounds that are
more reactive than ethane continue to be considered VOC for regulatory
purposes and, therefore, are subject to control requirements. The
selection of ethane as the threshold compound was based on a series of
smog chamber experiments that underlay the 1977 policy.
    The EPA has used three different metrics to compare the reactivity
of a specific compound to that of ethane: (i) The rate constant for
reaction with the hydroxyl radical (OH) (known as kOH); (ii)
the maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) on a reactivity per unit mass
basis; and (iii) the MIR expressed on a reactivity per mole basis.
Differences between these three metrics are discussed below.
    The kOH is the rate constant of the reaction of the
compound with the OH radical in the air. This reaction is often, but
not always the first and rate-limiting step in a series of chemical
reactions by which a compound breaks down in the air and contributes to
O3 formation. If this step is slow, the compound will likely
not form O3 at a very fast rate. The kOH values
have long been used by the EPA as metrics of photochemical reactivity
and O3-forming activity, and they have been the basis for
most of the EPA's early exemptions of negligibly reactive compounds
from the regulatory definition of VOC. The kOH metric is
inherently a molar-based comparison, i.e., it measures the rate at
which molecules react.
    The MIR, both by mole and by mass, is a more updated metric of
photochemical reactivity derived from a computer-based photochemical
model, and has been used as a consideration of reactivity since 1995.
This metric considers the complete O3-forming activity of a
compound over multiple hours and through multiple reaction pathways,
not merely the first reaction step with OH. Further explanation of the
MIR metric can be found in Carter (1994), ``Development of ozone
reactivity scales for volatile organic compounds.''
    The EPA has considered the choice between a molar or mass basis for
the comparison to ethane in past rulemakings and guidance. In the 2005
Interim Guidance, the EPA stated:

[A] comparison to ethane on a mass basis strikes the right balance
between a threshold that is low enough to capture compounds that
significantly affect ozone concentrations and a threshold that is
high enough to exempt some compounds that may usefully substitute
for more highly reactive compounds.
    When reviewing compounds that have been suggested for VOC-exempt
status, EPA will continue to compare them to ethane using
kOH expressed on a molar basis and MIR values expressed
on a mass basis.

    The 2005 Interim Guidance also noted that concerns have sometimes
been raised about the potential impact of a VOC exemption on
environmental endpoints other than O3 concentrations,
including fine particle formation, air toxics exposures, stratospheric
O3 depletion, and climate change. The EPA has recognized,
however, that there are existing regulatory and non-regulatory programs
that are specifically designed to address these issues, and the EPA
continues to believe in general that the impacts of VOC exemptions on
environmental endpoints other than O3 formation will be
adequately addressed by these programs. The VOC exemption policy is
intended to facilitate attainment of the O3 NAAQS. In
general, VOC exemption decisions will continue to be based solely on
consideration of a compound's contribution to O3 formation.
However, if the EPA determines that a particular VOC exemption is
likely to result in a significant increase in the use of a compound and
that the increased use would pose a significant risk to human health or
the environment that would not be addressed adequately by existing
programs or policies, then the EPA may exercise its judgment
accordingly in deciding whether to grant an exemption.

B. Petition To List HFE-347pcf2 as an Exempt Compound

    Asahi Glass Company, AGC Chemicals America, Inc. submitted a
petition to the EPA on February 5, 2007, requesting that 1,1,2,2-
Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-trifluoroethoxy) ethane (HFE-347pcf2; CAS number
406-78-0) be exempted from the regulatory definition of VOC. The
petition was based on the argument that HFE-347pcf2 has low reactivity
relative to ethane. The petitioner indicated that HFE-347pcf2 may be
used in a variety of applications as a precision cleaning agent to
remove contaminants including oil, flux, and fingerprints from items
like medical devices, artificial implants, crucial military and
aerospace items, electric components, printed circuit boards, optics,
jewelry, ball bearings, aircraft guidance systems, film, relays, and a
variety of metal components, among others.
    To support its petition, AGC Chemicals America, Inc. referenced
several documents, including two peer-reviewed journal articles on HFE-
347pcf2's reaction rates (Tokuhashi et al., 2000; Pitts et al, 1983).
In 2014, AGC provided a supplemental technical report on the maximum
incremental reactivity of HFE-347pcf2 (Carter, 2014). According to this
report, the maximum incremental reactivity of HFE-347pcf2 ranges
between 0.0007 g O3/g HFE-347pcf2 (best estimate) and 0.0013
g O3/g HFE-347pcf2 (high reactivity estimate) on the mass-
based MIR scale. This reactivity rate is much lower than that of ethane
(0.28 g O3/g ethane), the compound that the EPA has used for
comparison to define ``negligible'' O3 reactivity for the
purpose of exempting compounds from the regulatory definition of VOC.
The rate constant for the gas-phase reaction of OH radicals with HFE-
347pcf2 (kOH) has been measured to be 9.16 x
10-15 cm\3\/molecule-sec at ~298 K (Pitts et al., 1983,
Tokuhashi et al., 2000). Based on the measured reactivity rate of HFE-
347pcf2 (Pitts et al., 1983), HFE-347pcf2 has a smaller kOH
than ethane (kOH of ethane = 2.4 x 10-13 cm\3\/
molecule-sec at ~298 K) and, therefore, is less reactive than ethane.
    To address the potential for stratospheric O3 impacts,
the petitioner contended that, given the atmospheric lifetime of HFE-
347pcf2 and that it does not contain chlorine or bromine, it is not
expected to contribute to the depletion of the stratospheric
O3 layer.

IV. The EPA's Assessment of the Petition

    The EPA is taking direct final action to respond to the petition by
exempting HFE-347pcf2 from the regulatory definition of VOC. This
action is based on consideration of the compound's low contribution to
tropospheric O3 and the low likelihood of risk to human
health or the environment. In this case, the EPA considered issues of
contribution to stratospheric O3 depletion, toxicity, and
climate change. Additional information on these topics is provided in
the following sections.

A. Contribution to Tropospheric Ozone Formation

    The reaction rate of HFE-347pcf2 with the OH radical
(kOH) has been measured to be 9.16 x 10-15 cm\3\/
molecule-sec (Tokuhashi et al., 2000); other reactions with
O3 and the nitrate radical were negligibly small. The
corresponding reaction rate of ethane with OH is 2.4 x 10-13
cm\3\/molecule-sec (Atkinson et al., 2006).
    The overall atmospheric reactivity of HFE-347pcf2 was not studied
in an experimental smog chamber, but the chemical mechanism derived
from other chamber studies (Carter, 2011) was used to model the
complete formation of O3 for an entire single day under
realistic atmospheric conditions (Carter, 2014). In 2014, Carter
calculated a MIR value of 0.0007 to 0.0013 g O3/g VOC for
HFE-347pcf2 for ``averaged conditions,'' versus 0.28 g O3/g
VOC for ethane.
    Table 1 presents the three reactivity metrics for HFE-347pcf2 as
they compare to ethane.

                                 Table 1--Reactivities of Ethane and HFE-347pcf2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Maximum
                                                                              incremental           Maximum
                      Compound                            kOH (cm\3\/      reactivity (MIR)       incremental
                                                         molecule-sec)      (g O3/mole VOC)    reactivity (MIR)
                                                                                (g O3/g VOC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ethane..............................................       2.4 x 10-\13\                 8.4                0.28
HFE-347pcf2.........................................      9.16 x 10-\15\           0.14-0.26       0.0007-0.0013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
1. kOH value at 298 K for ethane is from Atkinson et al., 2006 (page 3626).
2. kOH value at 298 K for HFE-347pcf2 is from Tokuhashi, 2000.
3. Mass-based MIR value (g O3/g VOC) of ethane is from Carter, 2011.
4. Mass-based MIR value (g O3/g VOC) of HFE-347pcf2 is from a supplemental report by Carter, 2014.
5. Molar-based MIR (g O3/mole VOC) values were calculated from the mass-based MIR (g O3/g VOC) values using the
  number of moles per gram of the relevant organic compound.

    The data in Table 1, shows that HFE-347pcf2 has a significantly
lower kOH value than ethane, meaning that it initially
reacts less quickly in the atmosphere than ethane. Also, a molecule of
HFE-347pcf2 is less reactive than a molecule of ethane in terms of
complete O3-forming activity as shown by the molar-based MIR
(g O3/mole VOC) values. Additionally, one gram of HFE-
347pcf2 has a lower capacity than one gram of ethane to form
O3. Thus, following the 2005 Interim Guidance, HFE-347pcf2
is eligible to be exempted from the regulatory definition of VOC on the
basis of kOH and both the mole- and mass-based MIR.

B. Contribution to Stratospheric Ozone Depletion

    HFE-347pcf2 is unlikely to contribute to the depletion of the
stratospheric O3 layer. The O3 depletion
potential (ODP) of HFE-347pcf2 is expected to be negligible based on
several lines of evidence: The absence of chlorine or bromine from the
compound, the expected initial reactions described in Carter (2008),
and the general theory supporting the estimated mechanisms of its
reactivity with the hydroxyl OH discussed in Carter (2011).
    The Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program is the EPA's
program to evaluate and regulate substitutes for end uses historically
using ozone-depleting chemicals. Under Section 612(c) of the CAA, the
EPA is required to identify and publish lists of acceptable and
unacceptable substitutes for class I or class II ozone-depleting
substances. According to the SNAP program finding, the HFE-347pcf2 ODP
is zero and therefore HFE-347pcf2 is listed as an acceptable substitute
for several of these ozone-depleting chemicals in electronics and
precision cleaning and as an aerosol solvent in 2012.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 77 FR 47768, August 10, 2012. Also see list of acceptable
cleaning solvents under SNAP decision: http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/solvents/solvents.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Toxicity

    Based on a screening assessment of the health and environmental
risks of HFE-347pcf2 (available in the docket for the SNAP rule at EPA-
HQ-OAR-2003-0118 under the name, ``Risk Screen on Substitutes CFC-113,
Methyl Chloroform, and HCFC-141b in Aerosol Solvent, Electronics
Cleaning, and Precision Cleaning Substitute: HFE-347pcf2''), the SNAP
program anticipated that users will be able to use the compound in
precision cleaning without significantly greater health risks than
presented by use of other available substitutes.
    Potential health effects of HFE-347pcf2 include coughing,
dizziness, dullness, drowsiness, and headache. Higher concentrations
can produce heart irregularities, central nervous system depression,
narcosis, unconsciousness, respiratory failure, or death. This compound
may also irritate the skin or eyes. The acute and short-term studies
presented during the SNAP review indicated that HFE-347pcf2 is toxic by
inhalation, and mortality was observed at high concentrations of 2000
ppm and above. HFE-347pcf2 is not commonly used outside of industrial
settings, and other compounds in the same industrial uses have similar
health and environmental risks. The SNAP program, in their listing of
HFE-347pcf2 as an acceptable substitute in aerosol solvent, recommended
that adequate ventilation and good industrial hygiene practice be
utilized due to the potential neurotoxic effects of this substitute at
high acute (short-term) concentrations. The manufacturer recommended an
acceptable exposure limit (AEL) for the workplace of 50 ppm (8-hr total
weight average, TWA). The EPA recommended a maximum allowable human
exposure limit of 150 ppm for HFE-347pcf2. The EPA anticipates that
users following good practices will be able to use HFE-347pcf2 in
electronics and precision cleaning without appreciable health risks.
    HFE-347pcf2 is not regulated as a hazardous air pollutant (HAP)
under Title I of the CAA. Also, it is not listed as a toxic chemical
under Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Act (EPCRA).
    The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) gives the EPA authority to
assess and prevent potential unreasonable risks to human health and the
environment before a new chemical substance is introduced into
commerce. Section 5 of TSCA requires manufacturers and importers to
notify the EPA before manufacturing or importing a new chemical
substance by submitting a pre-manufacture notice (PMN) prior to the
manufacture (including import) of the chemical. Under the TSCA New
Chemicals Program, the EPA then assesses whether an unreasonable risk
may, or will, be presented by the expected manufacture, processing,
distribution in commerce, use, and disposal of the new substance. The
PMN for HFE-347pcf2 stated the substance will be used in industrial
settings for cleaning electronic components, precision cleaning,
dewatering of electronic components and other parts following aqueous
cleaning, and as a carrier/lubricant coating for hard disk drives and
other precision parts. EPA did not determine that the above-listed
proposed industrial processing or use of the substance presents an
unreasonable risk. The EPA has determined, however, that domestic
manufacture, use in non-industrial products, or use other than as
described in the PMN may cause serious chronic health effects. To
mitigate risks identified during the PMN review of HFE-347pcf2 (PMN P-
04-0635), EPA issued a Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) \2\ requiring
that manufacturers notify the EPA prior to manufacture or processing of
the compound for any new use other than those proposed in the PMN. The
required notification will provide the EPA with the opportunity to
evaluate the intended use and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit that
activity before it occurs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 77 FR 61117 (Oct. 5, 2012): FR document, with preamble
background. See 40 CFR 721.10549.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Contribution to Climate Change

    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth
Assessment Report (IPCC AR5) estimated the lifetime of HFE-347pcf2 to
be 6.0 years and the radiative efficiency to be 0.48 W/m\2\/ppb. The
report estimated the resulting 100-year global warming potential (GWP)
to be 889, meaning that, over a 100-year period, one ton of HFE-347pcf2
traps 889 times as much warming energy as one ton of CO2
(IPCC, 2013).\3\ HFE-347pcf2's GWP of 889 is lower than some of the
substitutes in the end uses for which it has been listed as acceptable
under the SNAP program, such as HFC-4310mee (GWP = 1650), but higher
than the GWP of some other substitutes, such as HFC-365mfc (GWP = 804),
HFE-7100 (GWP = 421) and aqueous cleaners with no direct GWP. Under the
SNAP program, the EPA continually reviews the availability of
acceptable substitutes and expects to eventually eliminate higher-GWP
chemicals from the list of acceptable compounds as safer, lower-GWP
substitutes become available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The GWP value for HFE-347pcf2 of 580 considered in the 2012
SNAP decision came from the previous IPCC report, AR4 (IPCC, 2007).
AR4 GWP values are still used in a number of regulatory and
reporting contexts to maintain consistency and allow for analysis of
trends.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Conclusions

    The EPA finds that HFE-347pcf2 is negligibly reactive with respect
to its contribution to tropospheric O3 formation and thus
may be exempted from the EPA's definition of VOC in 40 CFR 51.100(s).
HFE-347pcf2 has been

listed as acceptable for use in electronic and precision cleaning and
as an aerosol solvent under the SNAP program (USEPA, 2004). The EPA
determined that HFE-347pcf2 has a similar or lower stratospheric
O3 depletion potential than available substitutes in those
end uses and that the toxicity risk from using HFE-347pcf2 is not
significantly greater than the risk from using other available
alternatives. HFE-347pcf2, among other hydrofluoroethers, was found by
both the Montreal Protocol's solvents, coatings, and adhesives
technical options committee in 2002 and its technical and economic
assessment panel in 2005, to be a suitable replacement for other, more
harmful cleaning solvents (UNEP, 2002, 2005). HFE-347pcf2 is expected
to be used primarily for the purposes regulated by the SNAP program. It
is mostly replacing chemicals with higher GWP and the SNAP program will
continue to evaluate its acceptability as an alternative for those
specific uses, the EPA has concluded that non-tropospheric ozone-
related risks associated with potential increased use of HFE-347pcf2
are adequately managed by this program. The EPA does not expect
significant use of HFE-347pcf2 in applications not covered by the SNAP
program. However, the SNUR in place under TSCA requires that any
significant new use of the chemical be reported to EPA using a
Significant New Use Notice (SNUN).
    Any significant new use of HFE-347pcf2 would need to be evaluated
by the EPA, and the EPA will continually review the availability of
acceptable substitute chemicals from the list of acceptable compounds
under the SNAP program as lower-GWP substitutes become available, which
could lead to restrictions on the use of HFE-347pcf2, should safer,
lower-GWP substitutes become available. At this time, SNAP does not
anticipate further evaluation of HFE-347pcf2 to potentially remove the
compound from the list of acceptable substitutes in the precision
cleaning end-use largely because the use of the chemical is limited to
a small niche market.

V. Direct Final Action

    The EPA is responding to the petition by revising its regulatory
definition of VOC at 40 CFR 51.100(s) to add HFE-347pcf2 to the list of
compounds that are exempt from the regulatory definition of VOC because
it is less reactive than ethane based on a comparison of
kOH, and mass-based MIR, and molar-based MIR metrics and is
therefore considered negligibly reactive. As a result of this action,
if an entity uses or produces any of this compound and is subject to
the EPA regulations limiting the use of VOC in a product, limiting the
VOC emissions from a facility, or otherwise controlling the use of VOC
for purposes related to attaining the O3 NAAQS, then this
compound will not be counted as a VOC in determining whether these
regulatory obligations have been met. This action may also affect
whether this compound is considered a VOC for state regulatory purposes
to reduce O3 formation if a state relies on the EPA's
regulatory definition of VOC. States are not obligated to exclude from
control as a VOC those compounds that the EPA has found to be
negligibly reactive. However, no state may take credit for controlling
this compound in its O3 control strategy. Consequently,
reduction in emissions for this compound will not be considered or
counted in determining whether states have met the rate of progress
requirements for VOC in SIPs or in demonstrating attainment of the
O3 NAAQS.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA. It does not contain any recordkeeping or reporting
requirements.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This action
removes HFE-347pcf2 from the regulatory definition of VOC and thereby
relieves manufacturers, distributers, and users of the compound from
requirements to control emissions of the compound.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local or tribal governments, or the private sector.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects 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.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This direct final rule removes HFE-347pcf2 from
the regulatory definition of VOC and thereby relieves manufacturers,
distributers and users from requirements to control emissions of the
compound. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to
children. Since HFE-347pcf2 is utilized in specific industrial
applications where children are not present and dissipates quickly,
there is no exposure or disproportionate risk to children. This action
removes HFE-347pcf2 from the regulatory definition of VOC and thereby
relieves manufacturers, distributers and users from requirements to
control emissions of the compound.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous

peoples, as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 February 16,
1994). This action removes HFE-347pcf2 from the regulatory definition
of VOC and thereby relieves manufacturers, distributers, and users of
the compound from requirements to control emissions of the compound.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).

L. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit Court within 60 days from the date the
final action is published in the Federal Register. Filing a petition
for review by the Administrator of this final action does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review
must be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such action.
Thus, any petitions for review of this action related to the exemption
of HFE-347pcf2 from the regulatory definition of VOC must be filed in
the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60
days from the date final action is published in the Federal Register.

References

Atkinson, R., Baulch, D. L., Cox, R. A., Crowley, J. N., Hampson,
Jr., R. F., Hynes, R. G., Jenkin, M. E., Kerr, J. A., Rossi, M. J.,
and Troe, J. (2006) Evaluated kinetic and photochemical data for
atmospheric chemistry: Volume II--gas phase reactions of organic
species. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 6: 3625-4055.
Carter, W. P. L. (1994) Development of ozone reactivity scales for
volatile organic compounds. J. Air Waste Manage, 44: 881-899.
Carter, W. P. L. (2008) Reactivity Estimates for Selected Consumer
Product Compounds, Final Report to California Air Resources Board
Contract No. 06-408, February 19, 2008. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/reactivity/consumer_products.pdf.
Carter, W. P. L. (2011) SAPRC Atmospheric Chemical Mechanisms and
VOC Reactivity Scales, Web page at http://www.engr.ucr.edu/~carter/
SAPRC/ Last updated in Sept. 14, 2013. Tables of Maximum Incremental
Reactivity (MIR) Values available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/mir2009/mir2009.htm. May 11, 2011.
Carter, W. P. L. (2014) Estimating the ground-level atmospheric
ozone formation potentials of 1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoro-1-(2,2,2-
trifluoroethoxy) ethane (HFE-347pcf2), November 13, 2014.
IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin,
M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H. L.
Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United
Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 996 pp.
IPCC, 2013: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.
Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T. F., D.
Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S. K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels,
Y. Xia, V. Bex and P. M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535 pp.
Pitts, J. N. Jr., Winer, A. M., Aschmann, S. M., Carter, W. P. L.,
and Atkinson, K. (1983), Experimental Protocol for Determining
Hydroxyl Radical Reaction Rate Constants Environmental Science
Research Laboratory, ORD, USEPA. EPA600/3-82-038.
Tokuhashi, K., Takahashi, A., Kaise, M., Kondo, K., Sekiya, A.,
Yamashita, S., and Ito, H., (2000), Rate Constants for the Reactions
of OH Radicals with CH3OCF2CHF2,
CHF2OCH2CF2CHF2,
CHF2OCH2CF2CF3, and
CF3CH2OCF2CHF2 over the
Temperature Range 250-430 K. J. Phys. Chem. Kinet A, 2000, V 104, N
6, 17 February, 2000.
UNEP (2002), Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone
Layer: 2002 Report of the Solvents, Coatings, and Adhesives
Technical Options Committee, Assessment Report, 2002.
UNEP Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, UNEP/TEAP, (2005),
Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer,
Progress Report, May 2005.
USEPA, (USEPA/SNAP), (2004), The U.S. Solvents Cleaning Industry and
the Transition to Non Ozone Depleting Substances, September 2004.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: July 20, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

    For reasons stated in the preamble, part 51 of chapter I of title
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 51--REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

Subpart F--Procedural Requirements

0
1. The authority citation for part 51, subpart F, continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7412, 7413, 7414, 7470-7479,
7501-7508, 7601, and 7602.

0
2. Section 51.100 is amended by revising the introductory text of
paragraph (s)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  51.100   Definitions.

* * * * *
    (s)(1) This includes any such organic compound other than the
following, which have been determined to have negligible photochemical
reactivity: Methane; ethane; methylene chloride (dichloromethane);
1,1,1-trichloroethane (methyl chloroform); 1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-
trifluoroethane (CFC-113); trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11);
dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12); chlorodifluoromethane (HCFC-22);
trifluoromethane (HFC-23); 1,2-dichloro 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (CFC-
114); chloropentafluoroethane (CFC-115); 1,1,1-trifluoro 2,2-
dichloroethane (HCFC-123); 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a); 1,1-
dichloro 1-fluoroethane (HCFC-141b); 1-chloro 1,1-difluoroethane (HCFC-
142b); 2-chloro-1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HCFC-124); pentafluoroethane
(HFC-125); 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134); 1,1,1-trifluoroethane
(HFC-143a); 1,1-difluoroethane (HFC-152a); parachlorobenzotrifluoride
(PCBTF); cyclic, branched, or linear completely methylated siloxanes;
acetone; perchloroethylene (tetrachloroethylene); 3,3-dichloro-
1,1,1,2,2-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225ca); 1,3-dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-
pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225cb); 1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,5-decafluoropentane
(HFC 43-10mee); difluoromethane (HFC-32); ethylfluoride (HFC-161);
1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoropropane (HFC-236fa); 1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane
(HFC-245ca); 1,1,2,3,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC-245ea); 1,1,1,2,3-
pentafluoropropane (HFC-245eb); 1,1,1,3,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC-
245fa); 1,1,1,2,3,3-hexafluoropropane (HFC-236ea); 1,1,1,3,3-
pentafluorobutane (HFC-365mfc); chlorofluoromethane (HCFC-31); 1
chloro-1-fluoroethane (HCFC-151a); 1,2-dichloro-1,1,2-trifluoroethane
(HCFC-123a); 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4-nonafluoro-4-methoxy-butane
(C4F9OCH3 or HFE-7100); 2-
(difluoromethoxymethyl)-1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane

((CF3)2CFCF2OCH3); 1-
ethoxy-1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4-nonafluorobutane
(C4F9OC2H5 or HFE-7200); 2-
(ethoxydifluoromethyl)-1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane
((CF3)2CFCF2OC2H5
); methyl acetate; 1,1,1,2,2,3,3-heptafluoro-3-methoxy-propane (n-
C3F7OCH3, HFE-7000); 3-ethoxy-1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6-dodecafluoro-2-
(trifluoromethyl) hexane (HFE-7500); 1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane
(HFC 227ea); methyl formate (HCOOCH3); 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-
3-methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane (HFE-7300); propylene carbonate;
dimethyl carbonate; trans-1,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene;
HCF2OCF2H (HFE-134);
HCF2OCF2OCF2H (HFE-236cal2);
HCF2OCF2CF2OCF2H (HFE-
338pcc13);
HCF2OCF2OCF2CF2OCF2
H (H-Galden 1040x or H-Galden ZT 130 (or 150 or 180)); trans 1-chloro-
3,3,3-trifluoroprop-1-ene; 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene; 2-amino-2-
methyl-1-propanol; t-butyl acetate; 1,1,2,2- Tetrafluoro -1-(2,2,2-
trifluoroethoxy) ethane; and perfluorocarbon compounds which fall into
these classes:
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-17789 Filed 7-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 189 (Monday, September 30, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59806-59807]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23666]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1185; Airspace Docket No. 12-AAL-8]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; White Mountain, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace at White Mountain
Airport, White Mountain, AK, to accommodate aircraft using new Area
Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System (GPS) standard instrument
approach procedures at the airport. This improves the safety and
management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: Effective date, 0901 UTC, December 12, 2013. 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 7400.9 and publication of conforming
amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Roberts, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On December 21, 2012, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish controlled airspace
at White Mountain, Airport, White Mountain, AK (77 FR 75598).
Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005, of
FAA Order 7400.9X dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15,
2013, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1. The Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in that Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by establishing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface, at White Mountain Airport, White Mountain, AK.
Controlled airspace within a 6.3 mile radius of the airport, with
extensions to the northwest and southeast, is necessary to accommodate
aircraft using new RNAV (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures
to/from the en route environment at White Mountain Airport. This action
is necessary for the safety and management of IFR operations at the
airport.
    The FAA has determined this regulation only involves an established
body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments
are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this
regulation: (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
only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified
this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code.
Subtitle 1, Section 106 discusses 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 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 establishes
controlled airspace at White Mountain Airport, White Mountain, AK.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 311a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of 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(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 Part 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9X, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15,
2013 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

AAL AK E5 White Mountain, AK [New]

White Mountain Airport, AK
    (Lat. 64[deg]41'21'' N., long. 163[deg]24'46'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.3 mile radius of the White Mountain Airport, and within 1
mile either side of the 344[deg] bearing of the airport extending
from the 6.3-radius to 11 miles northwest of the airport, and within
1 mile either side of the 164[deg] bearing of the airport extending
from the 6.3-radius to 11 miles southeast of the airport.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on September 19, 2013.
Christopher Ramirez,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2013-23666 Filed 9-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 23, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 14)]
[Notices]
[Page 3512-3513]
[DOCID:fr23ja06-57]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0319; FRL-7750-3]

Notice of Filing of a Pesticide Petition for the Establishment of
an Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance for Residues of C10-
C11 Rich Aromatic Hydrocarbon Fluid in or on Food Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of a pesticide
petition proposing the establishment of an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of C10-11 rich aromatic
hydrocarbon fluid (Aromatic 150 Fluid) in or on food commodities when
used as an inert ingredient in pesticide products.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 22, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0319 and pesticide petition (PP) number
4E6934, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch
(PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001.
     Hand Delivery: Public Information and Records Integrity
Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall 2, 1801
S. Bell St., Arlington, VA, Attention: Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2005-0319. The docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
docket facility is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2005-0319. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available on-line
at http://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 http://www.regulations.gov

or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov website 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 e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be captured automatically

and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/docket.htm/
.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulation.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, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Public Information and

Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall
2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. The docket facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the docket facility is (703) 305-
5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bipin Gandhi, Registration Division
(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<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. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the

information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify this document by docket ID number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
     Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is printing a summary of a pesticide petition received under
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a, proposing the establishment of an exemption from the
requirement of regulations in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of C10-11
rich aromatic hydrocarbon fluid (Aromatic 150 Fluid) in or on food
commodities when used as an inert ingredient in pesticide products. EPA
has determined that the pesticide petition contains data or information
regarding the elements set forth in FFDCA section 408(d)(2); however,
EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at
this time or whether the data support granting of the pesticide
petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on the
pesticide petition.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of the petition included in
this notice, prepared by the petitioner along with a description of the
analytical method available for the detection and measurement of the
pesticide chemical residues is available on EPA's Electronic Docket at
http://www.regulations.gov/. To locate this information on the home

page of EPA's Electronic Docket, select ``Quick Search'' and type the
OPP docket ID number ``EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0319'' in the search field. Once
the search has located the docket, clicking on the ``Docket ID'' will
bring up a list of all documents in the docket for the pesticide
including the petition summary.

New Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance

    PP 5E6934. ExxonMobil Chemical Company (ExxonMobil), Division of
Exxon Mobil Corporation, 13501 Katy Freeway, Houston, TX 77079,
proposes to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance
for residues of C10-11 rich aromatic hydrocarbon fluid (Aromatic 150
Fluid) in or on food commodities when used as an inert ingredient in
pesticide products. Because this petition is a request for a tolerance
exemption without numerical limitations, no analytical method is
required.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: January 12, 2006.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 06-571 Filed 1-20-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 123 (Monday, June 27, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37309-37311]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15931]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 393

[Docket No. FMCSA-2010-0283]

Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Application
for Exemption From the Natural Gas Vehicles for America

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Application for exemption; request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)
requests public comment on an application for exemption submitted by
National Gas Vehicles for America (NGVAmerica) regarding the provision
in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) prohibiting
the location of any part of a fuel system on a bus manufactured on or
after January 1, 1973, ``within or above the passenger compartment.''
NGVAmerica states that the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) has adopted safety standards specific to natural
gas vehicles that do not restrict the location of such fuel systems.
NGVAmerica plans to file a petition in the near future to request a
modification to the FMCSRs and requests the exemption to allow buses
equipped with roof-mounted natural gas tanks operating in interstate
commerce--and therefore subject to the FMCSRs--to operate without
penalty while the differences between the NHTSA and FMCSA regulations
are resolved.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 27, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by DOT DMS Docket Number
FMCSA-2010-0283 by any of the following methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments on the Federal electronic docket
site.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Ground Floor, Room W12-140, DOT Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
E.T., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and
docket

number for this notice. For detailed instructions on submitting
comments and additional information on the exemption process, see the
``Public Participation'' heading below. Note that all comments received
will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided. Please see the ``Privacy Act''
heading for further information.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or to Room W12-140,
DOT Building, New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
Privacy Act System of Records Notice for the DOT Federal Docket
Management System published in the Federal Register on January 17, 2008
(73 FR 3316), or you may visit http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.
    Public participation: The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is
generally available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. You can get
electronic submission and retrieval help and guidelines under the
``Help'' section of the http://www.regulations.gov Web site and also at
the DOT's http://docketsinfo.dot.gov Web site. If you want us to notify
you that we received your comments, please include a self-addressed,
stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement page that
appears after submitting comments online.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Luke W. Loy, Vehicle and Roadside
Operations Division, Office of Bus and Truck Standards and Operations,
MC-PSV,<PHONE_NUMBER>; Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Section 4007 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
(TEA- 21) [Pub. L. 105-178, June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 107, 401] amended
49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e) to provide authority to grant exemptions
from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs). On August
20, 2004, FMCSA published a final rule implementing section 4007 (69 FR
51589). Under this rule, FMCSA must publish a notice of each exemption
request in the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must
provide the public with an opportunity to inspect the information
relevant to the application, including any safety analyses that have
been conducted. The Agency must also provide an opportunity for public
comment on the request.
    The Agency reviews the safety analyses and public comments and
determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a level
of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that would be
achieved by complying with the regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The Agency
decision must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR 381.315(b)).
If the Agency denies the request, it must state the reason for doing
so. If the decision is to grant the exemption, the notice must specify
the person or class of persons receiving the exemption and the
regulatory provision or provisions from which an exemption is granted.
The notice must also specify the effective period of the exemption (up
to 2 years) and explain the terms and conditions of the exemption. The
exemption may be renewed (49 CFR 381.315(c) and 49 CFR 381.300(b)).

NGVAmerica's Application for Exemption

    On April 9, 2010, NGVAmerica applied for a 2-year exemption from 49
CFR 393.65(b)(6) to allow motor carriers to operate buses with rooftop-
mounted natural gas storage systems in interstate commerce. NGVAmerica
requested that the ``exemption be granted to all operators of natural
gas transit buses that have been manufactured in accordance with and
that satisfy regulations adopted by the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA).'' A copy of the application is included in the
docket referenced at the beginning of this notice.
    Section 393.65 of the FMCSRs specifies the requirements for fuel
systems for CMVs (49 CFR 393.65). These requirements apply to systems
for containing and supplying fuel for the operation of motor vehicles
or for the operation of auxiliary equipment installed on, or used in
connection with, motor vehicles. Section 393.65(b)(6) prohibits any
part of a fuel system of a bus manufactured on or after January 1,
1973, to be located ``within or above the passenger compartment.'' This
regulation applies generally to any fuel system on a bus, and is not
specific to buses with natural gas fuel systems.
    NHTSA's Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 303,
``Fuel system integrity of compressed natural gas vehicles,'' specifies
requirements for the integrity of motor vehicle fuel systems using
compressed natural gas, and applies to passenger cars, multipurpose
passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses that have a gross vehicle weight
rating (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds or less, and to all school buses
regardless of weight that use compressed natural gas as a motor fuel.
FMVSS No. 303 does not apply to transit buses with a GVWR over 10,000
pounds.
    FMVSS No. 304, ``Compressed natural gas fuel container integrity,''
specifies requirements for the integrity of compressed natural gas
motor vehicle fuel containers, and applies to each passenger car,
multipurpose passenger vehicle, truck, and bus that uses compressed
natural gas as a motor fuel and to each container designed to store
compressed natural gas as motor fuel onboard any motor vehicle. All
compressed natural gas containers manufactured on or after March 26,
1995, must meet a pressure cycling test that evaluates the container's
durability, a burst test to measure its strength, and a fire test to
ensure adequate pressure relief characteristics. The rule also
specifies labeling requirements.
    In a final rule published in the Federal Register on August 15,
2005 (70 FR 48008), FMCSA created a new section in the FMCSRs to
address requirements for compressed natural gas fuel containers.
Section 393.68, ``Compressed natural gas fuel containers,'' cross-
references NHTSA's requirements for compressed natural gas containers
in FMVSS No. 304.
    Neither FMVSS No. 303 nor FMVSS No. 304 specifies or limits the
location of compressed natural gas fuel systems on motor vehicles.
    In its exemption application, NGVAmerica notes that regulations
promulgated by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), another agency
within the U.S. Department of Transportation, require applicants for
Federal assistance to certify that any new bus they acquire has been
tested in accordance with 49 CFR Part 665, ``Bus Testing.'' NGVAmerica
states that, while 49 CFR 665.11 requires transit buses to ``meet all
applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, as defined by the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in part 571 of this
title,'' that section does not reference or require compliance with the
FMCSRs.
    In support of its application, NGVAmerica states:

    In the case of low-floor transit buses, which are the dominant
type of transit bus

now in production, all natural gas fuel storage systems are in fact
located on the roof-top above the passenger compartment and have
been for many years. In the 1990's, the American Public
Transportation Association (APTA) developed a model specification
for low-floor natural gas transit buses. The APTA specification was
published in 2000 and it indicates that compressed natural gas
storage cylinders can be mounted on the roof-top.\1\ In fact,
placement of compressed natural gas storage cylinders on the roof
top of buses is actually preferable. A key distinction in the
consideration of the storage of natural gas on the roof of a vehicle
is that, unlike gasoline and diesel fuel, natural gas is lighter
than air and as such would not puddle or accumulate below the roof
of the bus or in the passenger compartment of the bus but rather it
would rise away from the vehicle. It is believed the intent of the
existing regulation is to avoid the risk of fuel entering the
enclosed passenger space of the vehicle. While we have not searched
the history of Part 393.65, we believe that it, like other similar
regulations, were adopted at a time when only liquid fuels were used
as motor fuels and thus it is highly unlikely the drafters of the
regulation contemplated the use of a compressed fuel like natural
gas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ APTA, Standard Bus Procurement Guidelines: 40 ft. Low-Floor
CNG Technical Specifications (2000); http://www.apta.com/resources/reports and publications/Documents/lfeng.pdf. This document states
that ``[i]n the case of a low floor transit bus, the placement of
tanks shall be limited to the roof of the vehicle or in the
compartment above the engine of the vehicle.''

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the petitioner states:

    In support of our request, we also note that the National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA) has developed safety standards for
compressed natural gas vehicles. NFPA Code 52 (or NFPA 52)
specifically addresses the safety of gaseous fueled systems used on
motor vehicles. It is the nationally recognized standard for
compressed natural gas fueling systems. NFPA 52:6.3.2 provides that
``fuel supply containers on vehicles shall be permitted to be
located within, below, or above the driver or passenger compartment,
provided all connections to the container(s) are external to, or
sealed and vented from, these compartments.'' Thus, this standard,
like NHTSA's, allows compressed natural gas storage cylinders to be
located on the roof-top or above the passenger compartment of
transit buses.

    NGVAmerica states that most transit buses are operated within and
near large urban areas, and therefore operate intrastate. However, some
transit agencies are multi-jurisdictional entities and do operate bus
routes that cross State lines. These operations are subject to FMCSA
jurisdiction unless those transit agencies qualify under 49 CFR
390.3(f)(2), which exempts ``transportation performed by the Federal
government, a State, or any political subdivision of a State, or an
agency established under a compact between States that has been
approved by the Congress of the United States.''
    NGVAmerica also cites recent incidents in which transit buses have
been ticketed when driven across State lines while being delivered from
a manufacturing plant to the purchasing transit operator for
introduction into intrastate operation. In each of these instances, the
buses (1) complied with the requirements of FMVSS Nos. 303 and 304, and
(2) did not have any passengers (except the driver) when they were
stopped and cited for noncompliance with Sec.  393.65(b)(6) of the
FMCSRs.
    Given these facts, NGVAmerica contends that enforcement of Sec.
393.65(b)(6) as currently written could impede the interstate transport
of natural gas transit buses and place in jeopardy the daily use of
thousands of natural gas transit buses.
    Therefore, NGVAmerica requests that motor carriers be permitted to
operate buses with natural gas containers located above the passenger
compartment. NGVAmerica states that, given the properties of natural
gas and the fact that the buses in question comply with FMVSS Nos. 303
and/or 304 and NFPA Code 52, requiring such carriers' compliance with
Sec.  393.65(b)(6) is unwarranted. Based on the above, NGVAmerica
believes that granting the exemption will maintain a level of safety
that is equivalent to the level of safety achieved without the
exemption.

Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e), FMCSA requests
public comment from all interested persons on NGVAmerica's application
for exemption from 49 CFR 393.65(b)(6). All comments received before
the close of business on the comment closing date indicated at the
beginning of this notice will be considered and will be available for
examination in the docket at the location listed under the ADDRESSES
section of this notice. Comments received after the comment closing
date will be filed in the public docket and will be considered to the
extent practicable. In addition to late comments, FMCSA will also
continue to file in the public docket relevant information that becomes
available after the comment closing date. Interested persons should
continue to examine the public docket for new material.

    Issued on: June 21, 2011.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-15931 Filed 6-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 20 (Wednesday, January 30, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6401-6402]
[FR Doc No: 2013-02040]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Public Notice for Release of Aeronautical Property at the Wilkes-
Barre/Scranton International Airport (AVP), Avoca, PA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration is requesting public
comment on the Bi-County Board of Commissioners of Luzerne and
Lackawanna Counties request to release airport property and granting
right-of-way easements for use by the Pennsylvania Department of
Transportation (PennDOT) to construct an access roadway and required
drainage facilities. The request consists of a permanent release of
land (16.037 acres) for the roadway construction, a right-of-way
drainage easement (0.2 acre) for the highway, and a right-of-way
easement (0.183 acre) for the substitute sewer (supersedes previous
easement) for the Lower Lackawanna Valley Sanitary Authority.
    The parcel is located in the Borough of DuPont and Pittstown
Township, Luzerne County within the existing Wilkes-Barre/Scranton
International Airport property and consists of three areas. The first
area is located southeast of the northbound off ramp (exit 178A) of
Interstate 81 near its intersection with Terminal Road (SR 2059) to
Navy Way Road then along the Navy Way Road alignment south to the Lidy
Road intersection with Gedrich Street containing approximately 8 +/-
acres. The second area is located southeast of Laurel Lane and extends
southeast under the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport
approach light towers and the wooded area to the Pennsylvania Turnpike
Northeast Extension containing approximately 8 +/- acres. The third
area is located northwest of Campbell Street along Interstate 81 and
the pedestrian bridge over Interstate 81 containing approximately 0.26
+/- acres. This release request is for the purpose of permitting the
Airport Owner to sell and convey title of 16.037 acres for public
roadway, 0.20 acres for a drainage easement associated with the highway
and 0.183 acres for a substitute sewer easement displaced due to the
public road for a total of 16.42 acres.
    The Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport will receive fair
market value from the sale of the land. Areas impacted are not needed
for aeronautical use for current or foreseeable future aeronautical
activities.
    Documents reflecting the Sponsor's request are available, by
appointment only, for inspection at the Airport Managers office and the
FAA Harrisburg Airport District Office.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 1, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Documents are available for review at the Airport Manager's
office: Barry J. Centini, Airport Director, Wilkes-Barre/Scranton
International Airport, 100 Terminal Drive, Avoca, PA,<PHONE_NUMBER>; and
at the FAA Harrisburg Airports District Office: Lori K. Pagnanelli,
Manager, Harrisburg Airports District Office, 3905 Hartzdale Dr., Suite
508, Camp Hill, PA 17011,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian J. Gearhart, Project Manager at
the Harrisburg Airports District Office location listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA invites public comment on the
release of land and right-of-way easements at the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton
International Airport, Avoca, Pennsylvania at fair market value under
the provisions of Section 47125(a) of Title 49 United States Code
(U.S.C.).
    Approximately 8+/- acres of the property is currently non-
aeronautical use vacant land and access roadway and approximately 8+/-
acres of the property is aeronautical use and is under the approach
near the Approach

Lighting System for Runway 4. The requested release is for the purpose
of permitting the Sponsor to sell and convey an easement for the
subject 16.42 Acres to be used as a public road. The majority of the
parcel was acquired with Federal participation through grant (9-36-034-
C407) issued on September 25, 1963 for parcels 52A, 52B, and 52C; grant
(6-42-0105-12) issued on September, 1980 for parcels 19, 20 and 27; and
grant (3-42-0105-06-85) issued on December 13, 1984 for parcel 50.
There are no known adverse impacts to the operation of the airport and
the land is not needed for any foreseeable future aeronautical
development as shown on the current approved Wilkes-Barre/Scranton
International Airport Layout Plan (ALP). All sales proceeds are to
remain on the airport for eligible Airport Improvement Program projects
at the airport.
    Any person may inspect the request by appointment at the FAA office
address listed above. Interested persons are invited to comment on the
proposed release from obligations. All comments will be considered by
the FAA to the extent practicable.

    Issued in Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, January 18, 2013.
Lori K. Pagnanelli,
Manager, Harrisburg Airports District Office.
[FR Doc. 2013-02040 Filed 1-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P