[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 24 (Tuesday, February 7, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9515-9519]
[FR Doc No: 2017-02530]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0134; FRL-9957-58-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; NOX as a Precursor to Ozone, PM2.5
Increment Rules and PSD Infrastructure SIP Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a
revision to Wisconsin's state implementation plan (SIP), revising
portions of the State's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
and ambient air quality programs to address deficiencies identified in
EPA's previous narrow infrastructure SIP disapprovals and Finding of
Failure to Submit (FFS). This SIP revision request is consistent with
the Federal PSD rules and addresses the required elements of the fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) PSD Increments, Significant
Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC)
Rule. EPA is also approving elements of SIP submissions from Wisconsin
regarding PSD infrastructure requirements of section 110 of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) for the 1997 PM2.5, 1997 ozone, 2006
PM2.5, 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 nitrogen dioxide
(NO2), 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2), and 2012
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The
infrastructure requirements are designed to ensure that the structural
components of each state's air quality management program are adequate
to meet the state's responsibilities under the CAA.

DATES: This final rule is effective on March 9, 2017.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0134. All documents in the docket are listed on

the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
through www.regulations.gov or at the Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We recommend
that you telephone Andrea Morgan, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 353-
6058, before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrea Morgan, Environmental Engineer,
Air Permitting Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What is the background of these SIP submissions?
II. What action did EPA propose on the SIP submissions?
III. What comments were received on the proposed rulemaking?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the background of these SIP submissions?

    On August 8, 2016, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
(WDNR) submitted a SIP revision request to EPA to revise portions of
its PSD and ambient air quality programs to address deficiencies
identified in EPA's previous narrow infrastructure SIP disapprovals and
FFS. Final approval of this SIP revision request will be consistent
with the Federal PSD requirements and will address the required
elements of the PM2.5 PSD Increments, SILs and SMC Rule.
Wisconsin submitted revisions to its rules NR 404 and 405 of the
Wisconsin Administrative Code. The submittal requests that EPA approve
the following revisions to Wisconsin's SIP: (1) Amend NR
404.05(2)(intro); (2) create NR 404.05(2)(am); (3) amend NR
404.05(3)(intro); (4) create NR 404.05(3)(am); (5) amend NR
404.05(4)(intro); (6) create NR 404.05(4)(am); (7) amend NR 405.02(3),
(21)(a), and (21m)(a); (8) create NR 405.02(21m)(c); (9) amend NR
405.02(22)(b) and (22m)(a)1. and (b)1.; (10) create NR
405.02(22m)(a)3.; (11) amend NR 405.02(27)(a)6.; (12) amend NR
405.07(8)(a)3m; (13) create NR 405.07(8)(a)3m (Note); and (14) amend NR
405.07(8)(a)5.(Note).
    WDNR also requested that this SIP revision supplement the PSD
portions of its previously submitted infrastructure submittals,
including 1997 PM2.5, 1997 ozone, 2006 PM2.5,
2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2, and
2012 PM2.5.

A. PSD Rule Revisions

1. PM2.5 Increments
    To implement the PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA issued two separate
final rules that establish the New Source Review (NSR) permitting
requirements for PM2.5: The NSR PM2.5
Implementation Rule promulgated on May 16, 2008 (73 FR 28321), and the
PM2.5 PSD Increments, SILs and SMC Rule promulgated on
October 20, 2010 (75 FR 64864). EPA's 2008 NSR PM2.5
Implementation Rule required states to submit applicable SIP revisions
to EPA no later than May 16, 2011, to address this rule's PSD and
nonattainment NSR SIP requirements. This rule requires that the state
submit revisions to its SIP, including the identification of precursors
for PM2.5, the significant emissions rates for
PM2.5 and the requirement to include emissions which may
condense to form particulate matter at ambient temperatures, known as
condensables, in permitting decisions. EPA published a final approval
of a revision to Wisconsin's SIP on October 16, 2014, (79 FR 62008),
which included all of the required elements of the 2008 NSR
Implementation Rule.
    The PM2.5 PSD Increments, SILs and SMC Rule required
states to submit SIP revisions to EPA by July 20, 2012, adopting
provisions equivalent to or at least as stringent as the
PM2.5 PSD increments and associated implementing
regulations. On August 11, 2014, EPA published a finding that Wisconsin
had failed to submit the required elements of the PM2.5 PSD
Increments, SILs and SMC Rule (79 FR 46703).
    The PM2.5 PSD Increments, SILs and SMC Rule also allows
states to discretionarily adopt and submit for EPA approval: (1) SILs,
which are used as a screening tool to evaluate the impact a proposed
new major source or major modification may have on the NAAQS or PSD
increment; and (2) a SMC (also a screening tool), which is used to
determine the subsequent level of data gathering required for a PSD
permit application for emissions of PM2.5. However, on
January 22, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia (Court) granted a request from EPA to vacate and remand to
EPA the portions of the PM2.5 PSD Increments, SILs and SMC
Rule PM2.5 addressing the SILs for PM2.5 so that
EPA could voluntarily correct an error in these provisions. The Court
also vacated parts of the PM2.5 PSD Increments, SILs and SMC
Rule establishing a PM2.5 SMC, finding that EPA was
precluded from using the PM2.5 SMCs to exempt permit
applicants from the statutory requirement to compile preconstruction
monitoring data. Sierra Club v. EPA, 705 F.3d 458, 463-69. On December
9, 2013, EPA issued a good cause final rule formally removing the
affected SILs and replacing the SMC with a numeric value of 0
micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) and a note that no exemption
is available with regard to PM2.5. See 78 FR 73698. As a
result, SIP submittals could no longer include the vacated
PM2.5 SILs at 40 CFR 51.166(k)(2) and 52.21(k)(2) and the
PM2.5 SMC must be revised to 0 [micro]g/m\3\, consistent
with 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c).
2. Ozone
    On November 29, 2005, EPA published (70 FR 71612) in the Federal
Register the ``Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard--Phase 2''. Part of this rule established,
among other requirements, oxides of nitrogen (NOX) as a
precursor to ozone. The final rule became effective on January 30,
2006.
    On October 6, 2014, EPA finalized approval of revisions to
Wisconsin's SIP that included the identification of NOX as a
precursor to ozone in the definition of regulated NSR pollutant. See 79
FR 60064.

B. Infrastructure SIP Submittals

    The requirement for states to make a SIP submission of this type
arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1),
states must make SIP submissions ``within 3 years (or such shorter
period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a
national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision
thereof),'' and these SIP submissions are to provide for the
``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The
statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP
submissions,

and the requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon
EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that ``[e]ach
such plan'' submission must address.
    This specific rulemaking is only taking action on the PSD elements
of the Wisconsin infrastructure submittals. Separate action has been or
will be taken on the non-PSD infrastructure elements in separate
rulemakings. The infrastructure elements for PSD are found in CAA
110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D), and 110(a)(2)(J) and will be discussed in
detail below. For further discussion on the background of
infrastructure submittals, see 77 FR 45992, August 2, 2012.

II. What action did EPA propose on the SIP submissions?

    On September 30, 2016 (81 FR 67261), EPA proposed approval of a SIP
revision from WDNR requesting EPA to revise portions of its PSD and
ambient air quality programs to address PM2.5 increment
requirements and incorporating NOX as an ozone precursor.
EPA proposed that these revisions were made to meet EPA's requirements
for Wisconsin's PSD and NSR program and are consistent with Federal
regulations.
    EPA proposed that the revisions pertaining to PM2.5
increments are consistent with Federal regulations and fully address
the requirements of the PM2.5 PSD Increments, SILs, and SMC
Rule. EPA also proposed that revisions pertaining to NOX as
a precursor to ozone, in conjunction with EPA's October 6, 2014
approval (79 FR 60064), will address all of the PSD requirements of the
``Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard--Phase 2''.
    WDNR also requested that this SIP revision supplement the PSD
portions of its previously submitted infrastructure submittals. EPA
proposed that based on the approval of the PSD related SIP revisions
mentioned above and previously approved SIP revisions (see 79 FR 62008,
October 16, 2014), EPA is able to fully approve the PSD related
infrastructure requirements found in CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C),
(D)(i)(II), and (J) for Wisconsin's 1997 PM2.5, 1997 ozone,
2006 PM2.5, 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, 2010
SO2, and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS submittals.

III. What comments were received on the proposed rulemaking?

    The comment period for the proposed action associated with today's
rulemaking (81 FR 67261) closed on October 31, 2016. EPA received two
supportive comments.

IV. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving revisions to Wisconsin's SIP that implement the
PM2.5 increment requirements and also incorporate
NOX as an ozone precursor. These revisions were made to meet
EPA's requirements for Wisconsin's PSD and NSR program and are
consistent with Federal regulations. Specifically, EPA is approving the
following:

(i) NR 404.05(2)(intro) and (am)
(ii) NR 404.05(3)(intro) and (am)
(iii) NR 404.05(4)(intro) and (am)
(iv) NR 405.02(3) and (21)(a)
(v) NR 405.02(21m)(a) and (c)
(vi) NR 405.02(22)(b)
(vii) NR 405.02(22m)(a)1. and 3., and (b)1.
(viii) NR 405.02(27)(a)6.
(ix) NR 405.07(8)(a)3m and 3m(Note)
(x) NR 405.07(8)(a)5.(Note)

    The revisions pertaining to PM2.5 increments will fully
address the requirements of the PM2.5 PSD Increments, SILs,
and SMC Rule and the deficiencies identified in EPA's August 11, 2014,
Finding of Failure to Submit. The revisions pertaining to
NOX as a precursor to ozone will, in conjunction with EPA's
October 6, 2014 approval, address all of the PSD requirements of the
``Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard--Phase 2'' and stops the Federal Implementation Plan (FIP)
clock triggered by the FFS mentioned above (79 FR 46704, August 11,
2014).
    EPA is also approving the PSD related infrastructure requirements
found in CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) for Wisconsin's
1997 PM2.5, 1997 ozone, 2006 PM2.5, 2008 lead,
2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2, and 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS submittals. This action stops the FIP clock
triggered by the disapproval of NOX as a precursor to ozone
for the PSD provisions for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5
infrastructure SIPs (77 FR 35870, June 15, 2012). This action requires
significant revisions to existing portions of 40 CFR 52.2591. Because
there will already be substantial revisions, EPA will also be revising
additional portions of 40 CFR 52.2591 that are not related to PSD for
clarification or consolidation purposes only. These additional edits
will not change the meaning or intent of the original language.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Wisconsin
Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 5
Office (please contact the person identified in the ``For Further
Information Contact'' section of this preamble for more information).

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible

methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by April 10, 2017. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
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 may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides.

    Dated: December 13, 2016.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

0
2. Section 52.2570 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(135) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.2570   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (135) On August 8, 2016, WDNR submitted a request to revise
portions of its Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)and
ambient air quality programs to address the required elements of the
fine particulate matter (PM2.5) PSD Increments, Significant
Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC)
Rule and the Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard--Phase 2. Wisconsin submitted revisions to its
rules NR 404 and 405 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Wisconsin Administrative Code, NR 404.05 Ambient Air
Increments. NR 404.05(2) introductory text; NR 404.05(2)(am); NR
404.05(3) introductory text; NR 404.05(3)(am); NR 404.05(4)
introductory text; and NR 404.05(4)(am), as published in the Register,
July 2016, No. 727, effective August 1, 2016.
    (B) Wisconsin Administrative Code, NR 405.02 Definitions. NR
405.02(3); NR 405.02(21)(a); NR 405.02(21m), except (b); NR
405.02(22)(b); NR 405.02(22m)(a)1. and 3. and (b)1.; and NR
405.02(27)(a)6., as published in the Register, July 2016, No. 727,
effective August 1, 2016.
    (C) Wisconsin Administrative Code, NR 405.07 Review of major
stationary sources and major modifications -- source applicability and
exemptions. NR 405.07(8)(a)3m; 405.07(8)(a)3m. Note; and NR
405.07(8)(a)5. Note, as published in the Register, July 2016, No. 727,
effective August 1, 2016.

0
3. Section 52.2591 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2591   Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements.

    (a) Approval. In a December 12, 2007 submittal, supplemented on
January 24, 2011, March 28, 2011, July 2, 2015, and August 8, 2016,
Wisconsin certified that the State has satisfied the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through (C), (D)(ii), (E) through
(H), and (J) through (M) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    (b) Approval. In a December 12, 2007 submittal, supplemented on
January 24, 2011, March 28, 2011, July 2, 2015, and August 8, 2016,
Wisconsin certified that the State has satisfied the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through (C), (D)(ii), (E) through
(H), and (J) through (M) for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.
    (c) Approval. In a January 24, 2011, submittal, supplemented on
March 28, 2011, June 29, 2012, July 2, 2015, and August 8, 2016,
Wisconsin certified that the State has satisfied the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through (H), and (J) through (M)
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. We are not finalizing
action on (D)(i)(I) and will address these requirements in a separate
action.
    (d) Approval. In a July 26, 2012, submittal, supplemented July 2,
2015, and August 8, 2016, Wisconsin certified that the State has
satisfied the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
through (H), and (J) through (M) for the 2008 lead (Pb) NAAQS.
    (e) Approval and Disapproval. In a June 20, 2013, submittal with a
January 28, 2015, clarification, supplemented July 2, 2015, and August
8, 2016, Wisconsin certified that the state has satisfied the
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through (H),
and (J) through (M) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. For 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I),
we are approving prong one and disapproving prong two.
    (f) Approval. In a June 20, 2013, submission with a January 28,
2015, clarification, supplemented July 2, 2015, and August 8, 2016,
Wisconsin certified that the state has satisfied the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through (H), and (J) through (M)
for the 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS.
    (g) Approval. In a June 20, 2013, submission with a January 28,
2015, clarification, supplemented July 2, 2015, and August 8, 2016,
Wisconsin certified that the state has satisfied the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through (H), and (J) through (M)
for the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) NAAQS. We are not taking
action on the transport provisions in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), and
will address these requirements in a separate action.
    (h) Approval. In a July 13, 2015, submission, supplemented August
8, 2016, WDNR certified that the state has satisfied the infrastructure
SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through (H), and (J) through
(M) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. We are not taking action on
the transport provisions in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), and the

stationary source monitoring and reporting requirements of section
110(a)(2)(F). We will address these requirements in a separate action.

[FR Doc. 2017-02530 Filed 2-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 54 (Monday, March 21, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15887-15889]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05779]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0174]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone; Cooper River Bridge Run, Cooper River and Town
Creek Reaches, Charleston, SC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone on
certain waters of the Cooper River and Town Creek Reaches. This action
is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable
waters near Charleston, South Carolina, during the Cooper River Bridge
Run. This regulation prohibits persons and vessels from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the security zone
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston (COTP) or a
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 7:30 a.m. to 11 a.m., on April 2,
2022.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2022-0174 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Commander Chad Ray, Sector Charleston
Waterways Management Division, Coast Guard; 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 and contrary to
the public interest. The primary justification for this action is that
the Coast Guard was given short notice from the event sponsor.
Therefore, the Coast Guard lacks sufficient time to provide a
reasonable comment period and then consider those comments before
issuing the rule. It would be impracticable and contrary to the public
interest to delay promulgating this rule, as it is necessary to protect
the safety of participants, spectators, and vessels transiting near the
race area during the Cooper River Bridge 10-K Run event.
    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 impracticable and contrary to the public interest
because the temporary security zone must be established on April 2,
2022 to ensure the safety of participants, spectators, and vessels
during the event.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034. The COTP Charleston has determined that potential hazards
associated with the large number of participants and spectators during
the run will be a safety and security concern. The purpose of the rule
is to ensure the safety and security of participants, spectators, the
general public, vessels and the navigable waters in the security zone
before, during and after the scheduled race.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a security zone from 7:30 a.m. to 11 a.m., on
April 2, 2022. The security zone will cover certain navigable waters of
the Cooper River and Town Creek Reaches in Charleston, South Carolina.
The duration of the zone is intended to ensure the safety and security
of the participants, spectators, and the general public during the
scheduled 7:30 a.m. to 11 a.m. race. No vessel or person will be
permitted to enter, transit through, anchor in or remain within the
security zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a
designated representative. If authorization to enter, transit through,
anchor in, or remain within the security zone is granted by the COTP or
a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such
authorization must comply with the instructions of the COTP or a
designated representative. The Coast Guard will provide notice of the
security zone by Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to
Mariners, or by on-scene designated representatives.

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 following
reasons: (1) The security zone only being enforced for a total of three
and a half hours; (2) although persons and vessels may not enter,
transit through, anchor in, or remain within the zone without
authorization from the COTP or a designated representative, they may
operate in the surrounding area during the enforcement period; (3)
persons and vessels may still enter, transit through, anchor in, or
remain within the areas during the enforcement period if authorized by
the COTP or a designated representative; and (4) the Coast Guard

will provide advance notification of the zone to the local maritime
community by Broadcast Notice to Mariners, or by on-scene designated
representatives.

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
security 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
contact 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
security zone that will prohibit persons and vessels from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within a limited area
surrounding the Cooper River Bridge on the waters of the Cooper River
and Town Creek Reaches during a race event lasting three and a half
hours. 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 contact 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; 46 U.S.C. 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1,
6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1, Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. Add Sec.  165. T07-0110 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T07-0110   Security Zone; Cooper River Bridge Run, Charleston
SC.

    (a) Location. All waters of the Cooper River, and Town Creek
Reaches encompassed within the following points: Beginning at
32[deg]48'32'' N, 079[deg]56'08'' W, thence east to 32[deg]48'20'' N,
079[deg]54'20'' W, thence south to 32[deg]47'20'' N, 079[deg]54'29'' W,
thence west to 32[deg]47'20'' N, 079[deg]55'28'' W, thence north to
origin. All coordinates are North American Datum 1983.
    (b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and
Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port (COTP) Charleston in the enforcement of the
regulated areas.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from
entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the
regulated area unless authorized by the COTP Charleston or a designated
representative.
    (2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor
in, or remain within the regulated area may contact the COTP Charleston
by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a

designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16, to request
authorization. If authorization is granted, all persons and vessels
receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions of the
COTP Charleston or a designated representative.
    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by
Broadcast Notice to Mariners, or by on-scene designated
representatives.
    (d) Enforcement Period. This rule will be enforced from 7:30 a.m.
until 11 a.m., on April 2, 2022.

    Dated: March 12, 2022.
J.D. Cole,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Charleston.
[FR Doc. 2022-05779 Filed 3-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 122 (Monday, June 25, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29554-29555]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13545]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2017-0320; FRL-9976-23-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Correction of Misreported Chemical
Substances on the TSCA Inventory (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted the
following information collection request (ICR) to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA): ``Correction of Misreported Chemical
Substances on the TSCA Inventory''. This is a request to renew the
approval of an existing ICR, which is currently approved through June
30, 2018. EPA did not

receive any public comments in response to the previously provided
public review opportunity issued in the Federal Register of February 6,
2018. With this submission to OMB, EPA is providing an additional 30
days for public review and comment.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before July 25, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-
2017-0320, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method) or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to
[email protected]. Address comments to the OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brandon Mullings, Environmental
Assistance Division (7507-M), Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Docket: Supporting documents, including the ICR that explains in
detail the information collection activities and the related burden and
cost estimates that are summarized in this document, are available in
the docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, West William
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW,
Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is (202)
566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    ICR status: This ICR (EPA ICR Number 1741.08, OMB Control Number
2070-0145) is currently scheduled to expire on June 30, 2018. Under OMB
regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the
collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
Under PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., an agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The OMB control numbers are displayed either by publication in the
Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the related
collection instrument or form, if applicable.
    Abstract: This ICR pertains to the form that the chemical industry
uses exclusively in submitting requests to EPA's Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) for correcting misreported chemical
identities of substances listed on the Inventory. Such requests pertain
only to errors discovered in the original submissions to the Inventory
when established in 1979.
    Section 8(b) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires
EPA to compile and keep current an Inventory of Chemical Substances in
Commerce, which is a listing of chemical substances manufactured,
imported, and processed for commercial purposes in the United States.
The purpose of the Inventory is to define, for the purpose of TSCA,
what chemical substances exist in U.S. commerce. Since the Inventory
thereby performs a regulatory function by distinguishing between
existing chemicals and new chemicals, it is imperative that the
Inventory be accurate. However, from time to time, EPA or respondents
discover that substances have been incorrectly described by reporting
companies. Reported substances have been unintentionally misidentified
as a result of simple typographical errors, the misidentification of
substances, or the lack of sufficient technical or analytical
information to characterize fully the exact chemical substances. EPA
has developed guidelines (45 FR 50544, July 29, 1980) under which
incorrectly described substances listed in the Inventory can be
corrected. The correction mechanism ensures the accuracy of the
Inventory without imposing an unreasonable burden on the chemical
industry. Without the Inventory correction mechanism, a company that
submitted incorrect information would have to file a pre-manufacture
notification (PMN) under TSCA section 5 to place the correct chemical
substance on the Inventory whenever the previously reported substance
is found to be misidentified. This would impose a much greater burden
on both EPA and the submitter than the existing correction mechanism.
This information collection applies to reporting and recordkeeping
activities associated with the correction of misreported chemical
substances found on the TSCA Inventory.
    Respondents may claim all or part of a response confidential. EPA
will disclose information that is covered by a claim of confidentiality
only to the extent permitted by, and in accordance with, the procedures
in TSCA section 14 and 40 CFR part 2.
    Form numbers: TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory Reporting Form C
(EPA Form 7710-3C).
    Respondents/affected entities: Manufacturers or importers of
chemical substances, mixtures or categories listed on the TSCA
Inventory and regulated under TSCA section 8, who had reported to EPA
during the initial effort to establish the TSCA Inventory in 1979, and
who need to make a correction to that submission.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.
    Total estimated number of respondents: 9.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Total estimated burden: 39.24 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $3,029.72 (per year), includes $0 annualized
capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the estimates: There is increase of 19 hours in the
total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently
approved by OMB. This increase reflects program changes in CBI
substantiation requirements, as enacted in the Frank R Lautenberg
Chemical Safety Act for the 21st Century, which amended TSCA in 2016.
This change is the result of a program change.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2018-13545 Filed 6-22-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 204 (Friday, October 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 65506]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27229]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13220-001]

Notice of Preliminary Permit Application Accepted for Filing and
Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing Applications;
Pacific Gas and Electric Company

    On September 1, 2011, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) filed
an application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of
the Federal Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the
Kings River Pumped Storage Project (project) to be located on North
Fork Kings River, Short Hair Creek, and Lost Canyon Creek, about 30
miles east of Shaver Lake in Fresno County, California. The sole
purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit
holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A
preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any
land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters
owned by others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of one of the following two
possible designs: \1\ (1) Option 1 consisting of (i) a dam in the Lost
Canyon area, 200 feet high and 700 feet long; (ii) a reservoir with a
surface elevation of 7,720 feet above mean sea level (msl) and an
estimated storage capacity of 15,695 acre-feet; (iii) an 8,000-foot-
long power tunnel including intake structure, penstock, and tailrace;
(2) option 2 consisting of (i) a dam in the Lower Short Hair Creek area
with a height of 175 feet high and length of 1,700 feet; (ii) a
reservoir with full pool elevation of 8,245 feet msl and storage
capacity of 16,290 acre-feet; (iii) a 14,000-foot-long power tunnel
including intake structure, penstock, and tailrace; (3) the existing
Wishon reservoir, with a surface area of 1,025 acres, storage capacity
of 128,639 acre-feet, and a normal water surface elevation of 6,550
feet msl, acting as the lower reservoir for either proposed plan; (4) a
powerhouse with a total installed capacity from 380 to 1,140 megawatts;
(5) a transmission line between 2,000 and 5,000 feet long and of 230 or
500 kilovolts; and (6) appurtenant facilities. The proposed project
would have an annual production between 508 and 2,031 gigawatt hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ PG&E would also investigate the possible addition of
equipment and other infrastructure within the existing Helms Project
(FERC Project No. 2375), which uses the existing Courtland reservoir
as the upper reservoir and the existing Wishon reservoir as a lower
reservoir. Any such addition may require an amendment of the
existing license.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Applicant Contact: Mr. Randall Livingston, Vice President--Power
Generation, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, 245 Market Street, San
Francisco CA 94105-1702; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Joseph Hassell; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-13220-001) in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: October 13, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-27229 Filed 10-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 16, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31995-31997]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12517]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0496; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-00393-R]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters and Airbus
Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (AHD) Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for Airbus Helicopters Model AS332C, AS332C1, AS332L, AS332L1, AS350B,
AS350BA, AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, AS350D, AS355E, AS355F, AS355F1,
AS355F2, AS355N, AS355NP, AS-365N2, AS 365 N3, EC120B, EC130B4,
EC130T2, EC 155B, EC155B1, SA-365N, and SA-365N1 helicopters; and
Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (AHD) Model EC135P1, EC135P2,
EC135P2+, EC135P3, EC135T1, EC135T2, EC135T2+, EC135T3, MBB-BK117 C-2,
and MBB-BK117 D-2 helicopters. This proposed AD was prompted by failure
of an Emergency Flotation System (EFS) float compartment to inflate
during maintenance of the EFS. This proposed AD would require
inspecting certain EFSs and depending on the results, marking certain
parts or removing certain parts from service, as specified in a
European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is proposed for
incorporation by reference (IBR). 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 August 2,
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 material that is proposed for IBR in this AD, contact EASA,
Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999
000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may
find this material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
You may view this material at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX
76177. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available in the AD docket on the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2021-0496.

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-
0496; 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. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

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-2021-0496; Project Identifier
MCAI-2020-00393-R'' 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
this 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 proposal.

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

Discussion

    EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2020-0064, dated March 19, 2020
(EASA AD 2020-0064), to correct an unsafe condition for Airbus
Helicopters (AH), formerly Eurocopter, Eurocopter France, Aerospatiale
Model EC 120 B, EC 175 B, AS 332 C, AS 332 C1, AS 332 L, AS 332 L1, AS
350 B, AS 350 B1, AS 350 B2, AS 350 BA, AS 350 BB, AS 350 B3, AS 350 D,
EC 130 B4, EC 130 T2, AS 355 E, AS 355 F, AS 355 F1, AS 355 F2, AS 355
N, AS 355 NP, SA 365 N, SA 365 N1, AS 365 N2, AS 365 N3, EC 155 B, and
EC 155 B1 helicopters. EASA AD 2020-0064 also corrects an unsafe
condition for Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (AHD), formerly
Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH; and Airbus Helicopters Inc., formerly
American Eurocopter LLC, Eurocopter Espa[ntilde]a S.A. Model MBB-BK117
C-2, MBB-BK117 D-2, EC 135 P1, EC 135 P2, EC 135 P2+, EC 135 P3, EC 135
T1, EC 135 T2, EC 135 T2+, EC 135 T3, EC 635 P2+, EC 635 P3, EC 635 T1,
EC 635 T2+, and EC 635 T3 helicopters. Model EC635 P2+, EC635 P3, EC635
T1, EC635 T2+, and EC635 T3 helicopters are not certificated by the FAA
and are not included on the U.S. type certificate data sheet except
where the U.S. type certificate data sheet explains that the

Model EC635T2+ helicopter having serial number 0858 was converted from
Model EC635T2+ to Model EC135T2+; this proposed AD therefore does not
include Model EC635 P2+, EC635 P3, EC635 T1, EC635 T2+, and EC635 T3
helicopters in the applicability.
    This proposed AD was prompted by failure of an EFS float
compartment to inflate during maintenance of the EFS. The FAA is
proposing this AD to address a blocked float supply hose. The unsafe
condition, if not addressed, could result in partial inflation of an
EFS float during an emergency landing on water and subsequently
preventing a timely egress from the helicopter, which could result in
injury to helicopter occupants. See EASA AD 2020-0064 for additional
background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR part 51

    EASA AD 2020-0064 specifies inspecting certain EFSs and depending
on the results, marking a float supply hose with a green dot with
indelible ink if the float supply hose passes an inspection, replacing
the float supply hose with a serviceable float supply hose, or
replacing an affected EFS with a serviceable EFS. EASA AD 2020-0064
also prohibits installing a float supply hose unless it passes the
inspection and is marked.
    This material is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    These products have been approved by the aviation authority of
another country, and are approved for operation in the United States.
Pursuant to the bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority,
the FAA has been notified of the unsafe condition described in EASA AD
2020-0064. The FAA is proposing this AD after evaluating all the
relevant information and determining the unsafe condition described
previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of these
same type designs.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2020-0064, described previously, as incorporated by
reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this proposed AD and except as discussed under
``Differences Between this Proposed AD and the EASA AD.''

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA initially worked with Airbus and EASA to develop a
process to use certain EASA ADs as the primary source of information
for compliance with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has
since coordinated with other manufacturers and civil aviation
authorities (CAAs) to use this process. As a result, EASA AD 2020-0064
will be incorporated by reference in the FAA final rule. This proposed
AD would, therefore, require compliance with EASA AD 2020-0064 in its
entirety, through that incorporation, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
Using common terms that are the same as the heading of a particular
section in the EASA AD does not mean that operators need comply only
with that section. For example, where the AD requirement refers to
``all required actions and compliance times,'' compliance with this AD
requirement is not limited to the section titled ``Required Action(s)
and Compliance Time(s)'' in the EASA AD. Service information specified
in EASA AD 2020-0064 that is required for compliance with EASA AD 2020-
0064 will be available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0496 after the FAA
final rule is published.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the EASA AD

    EASA AD 2020-0064 applies to Airbus Helicopters Model EC120B,
EC175B, AS332C, AS332C1, AS332L, AS332L1, AS350B, AS350B1, AS350B2,
AS350BA, AS350BB, AS350B3, AS350D, EC130B4, EC130T2, AS355E, AS355F,
AS355F1, AS355F2, AS355N, AS355NP, SA-365N, SA-365N1, AS-365N2, AS 365
N3, EC155 B, and EC155B1 helicopters and Airbus Helicopters Deutschland
GmbH Model MBB-BK 117 C-2, MBB-BK 117 D-2, EC135P1, EC135P2, EC135P2+,
EC135P3, EC135T1, EC135T2, EC135T2+, EC135T3, EC635 P2+, EC635P3,
EC635T1, EC635T2+, and EC635T3 helicopters, whereas this proposed AD
would not include Model AS350BB, EC175B, EC635P2+, EC635P3, EC635T1,
EC635T2+, and EC635T3 helicopters because these models are not FAA
type-certificated. Where the service information referenced in EASA AD
2020-0064 requires certain compliance times depending on whether the
helicopter is operated over water, this proposed AD would require
compliance within 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) instead. Where the
service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-0064 specifies ``work
must be performed on the helicopter by the operator,'' this proposed AD
would require that the work be accomplished by a mechanic that meets
the requirements of 14 CFR part 65 subpart D. Where some of the service
information referenced in EASA AD 2020-0064 specifies replacing or
removing an affected hose that fails the inspection, this proposed AD
would require removing the hose from service instead. Where some of the
service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-0064 specifies to
discard certain parts, this proposed AD would require removing those
parts from service instead. Where some of the service information
referenced in EASA AD 2020-0064 specifies to return the EFS to the
Safran Aerosystems network or clogged hoses to Safran Aerosystems
Services, this proposed AD would not include those requirements. Where
the service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-0064 specifies to
submit certain information to the manufacturer, this proposed AD does
not include that requirement.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 1,900 helicopters
of U.S. Registry. Labor rates are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Based
on these numbers, the FAA estimates that operators may incur the
following costs in order to comply with this proposed AD.
    Inspecting the EFS would take up to about 8 work-hours for an
estimated cost of up to $680 per helicopter and $1,292,000 for the U.S.
fleet.
    Replacing an EFS hose would take about 1 work-hour and parts cost
between $500 and $2,000 per hose, and up to $11,000 for a set of float
supply hoses, for an estimated cost of up to $11,085 per helicopter.

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:

Airbus Helicopters and Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (AHD):
Docket No. FAA-2021-0496; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-00393-R.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by August 2, 2021.

(b) Affected Airworthiness Directives (ADs)

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to the following helicopters, certificated in
any category, with an affected part as defined in European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2020-0064, dated March 19, 2020
(EASA AD 2020-0064), installed:
    (1) Airbus Helicopters Model AS332C, AS332C1, AS332L, AS332L1,
AS350B, AS350BA, AS350B1, AS350B2, AS350B3, AS350D, AS355E, AS355F,
AS355F1, AS355F2, AS355N, AS355NP, AS-365N2, AS 365 N3, EC120B,
EC130B4, EC130T2, EC 155B, EC155B1, SA-365N, and SA-365N1
helicopters, and
    Note 1 to paragraph (c)(1): Helicopters with an AS350B3e
designation are Model AS350B3 helicopters.
    (2) Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (AHD) Model EC135P1,
EC135P2, EC135P2+, EC135P3, EC135T1, EC135T2, EC135T2+, EC135T3,
MBB-BK117 C-2, and MBB-BK117 D-2 helicopters.
    Note 2 to paragraph (c)(2): Helicopters with an EC135P3H
designation are Model EC135P3 helicopters. Helicopters with an
EC135T3H designation are Model EC135T3 helicopters. Helicopters with
an MBB-BK117 C-2e designation are Model MBB-BK117 C-2 helicopters.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code: 2500, Cabin
Equipment/Furnishings.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by failure of an Emergency Flotation System
(EFS) float compartment to inflate during maintenance of the EFS.
The FAA is issuing this AD to address a blocked float supply hose.
The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in partial
inflation of an EFS float during an emergency landing on water and
subsequently preventing a timely egress from the helicopter, which
could result in injury to helicopter occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2020-0064.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2020-0064

    (1) Where EASA AD 2020-0064 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (2) Where paragraph (1) of the EASA AD requires inspecting each
affected part within the compliance time defined in section 1.E of
the applicable ASB, this AD requires inspecting each affected part
within 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective date of
this AD.
    (3) Where the service information referenced in paragraph (1) of
EASA AD 2020-0064 specifies that ``the work must be performed on the
helicopter by the operator,'' this AD requires that the work be
accomplished by a mechanic that meets the requirements of 14 CFR
part 65 subpart D.
    (4) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-
0064 specifies replacing or removing an affected hose that fails the
inspection, this AD requires removing the hose from service.
    (5) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-
0064 specifies to discard certain parts, this AD requires removing
those parts from service.
    (6) Where the service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-
0064 specifies returning the EFS to the Safran Aerosystems network
for compliance or returning clogged hoses to Safran Aerosystems
Services, this AD does not include those requirements.
    (7) The ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD 2020-0064 does not apply
to this AD.

(i) No Reporting Requirement

    Although the service information referenced in EASA AD 2020-0064
specifies to submit certain information to the manufacturer, this AD
does not include that requirement.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send
it to Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood
Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(k) Related Information

    (1) For EASA AD 2020-0064, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may
view this material at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX
76177. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This material may be found in the AD
docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching
for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0496.
    (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>
    Issued on June 9, 2021.
Ross Landes,
Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-12517 Filed 6-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Memo to File

From:  Allison Wiedeman

Date:  10/10/07

On October 10, 2007 EPA attended a listening session with OMB with the
CAFO industry and USDA officials.  Attendees are the following:

Name			Affiliation

Jim Laity		OMB/OIRA

Tamara Thies		NCBA

Deb Atwood		C&MC/AMI

Kevin Bromberg	SBA/Advocacy

Mike Formica		NPPC

Lisa Kelley		NCGA

Tom Hebert		United Egg Producers

Job Serebrov		USDA

Rick Swenson		USDA/NRES

Don Parrish		American Farm Bureau Federation

Charlie Garrison	The Garrison Group/NMPF

John Knepper		OMB

Art Fraas		OMB/OIRA

Kevin Neyland	OMB/OIRA

Susan Thomas		NPPC

Will Craig		NCFC

Allison Wiedeman	EPA

During the meeting the industry expressed the following opinions and
concerns.  No response was provided by EPA or OMB as this was a
listening session only.

There is no duty to apply for any industry even if they are discharging.

The permitting authority should not be able to "second guess" an
operator's claim to not needing a permit

Because there is no duty to apply, the only violation that can be cited
for a CAFO that discharges is for the discharge itself.

If EPA uses "propose to discharge" then they need to clarify that
propose means "intent".

Need to clearly define what the terms of the NMP that must go into the
permit.

If there is a change to the terms of the permit, there should be no
minor or major permit modification process required which includes
public review; only require the change to be reported in the annual
report.  They do not want the permit writer to have the discretion as to
what constitutes a substantial modification.

Want to make sure that information reported in the annual report would
not make them liable for citizen suits.

Do not want to provide prospective info in their annual report.

Need a simple "off-ramp" if operator chooses to terminate permit
coverage – and this decision would not be at the discretion of the
permit authority.

Would like the rule to say that if an unpermitted CAFO operating under
the ag stormwater exemption gets inspected, that it does not have to
provide the NMP for 24 - 48 hours (at present the final rule simple says
that documentation "must be either on site or at a nearby office, or
otherwise make such documentation readily available to the Director or
Regional Administrator upon request").

 PAGE

 PAGE   1


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 117 (Tuesday, June 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39839-39841]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13072]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 15229-001]

Alabama Power Company; Notice of Intent To File License
Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document (Pad), Commencement of
ILP Pre-Filing Process, and Scoping; Request for Comments on the Pad
and Scoping Document, and Identification of Issues and Associated Study
Requests

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application for
an Original License and Commencing Pre-filing Process.
    b. Project No.: 15229-001.
    c. Dated Filed: April 14, 2023.
    d. Submitted By: Alabama Power Company (Alabama Power).
    e. Name of Project: Chandler Mountain Pumped Storage Project.
    f. Location: The proposed project would be located on Little Canoe
Creek East and Chandler Mountain in Etowah and St. Clair Counties, near
the town of Steele, Alabama. The project would entail the construction
of a new 1,090-acre lower reservoir on Little Canoe Creek East and a
526-acre upper reservoir on Chandler Mountain, northwest of the
existing Chandler Mountain Lake.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR part 5 of the Commission's
Regulations.
    h. Applicant Contact: Angie Anderegg, Chandler Licensing Project
Manager, Alabama Power Company, 600 North 18th Street, Birmingham,
Alabama 35203;<PHONE_NUMBER>; [email protected].
    i. FERC Contact: Sarah Salazar at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email at
[email protected].
    j. Cooperating Agencies: Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests described in item o below. Cooperating agencies should note
the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation
of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See 94 FERC ]
61,076 (2001).
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with:
(a) the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations, thereunder, at
50 CFR part 402; and (b) the State Historic Preservation Officer, as
required by section 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the
implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. With this notice, we are designating Alabama Power as the
Commission's non-Federal representative for carrying out informal
consultation, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and
section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
    m. Alabama Power filed with the Commission a Pre-Application
Document (PAD, including a proposed process plan and schedule),
pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    n. A copy of the PAD may be viewed on the Commission's website
(http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field, to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at
[email protected], or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or
(202) 502-8659 (TTY). A copy of the PAD is also

available for public inspection during normal business hours at the
office of Alabama Power Company, 600 18th Street North, Birmingham, AL
35203. In addition, a copy of the PAD was distributed to the following
public libraries near the project: Rainbow City Public Library in
Etowah County and Steele Public Library in St. Clair County.
    You may register online at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/FERCOnline.aspx to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at [email protected].
    o. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the PAD and
Commission staff's Scoping Document 1 (SD1), as well as study requests.
All comments on the PAD and SD1, as well as study requests should be
sent to the address above in paragraph h. In addition, all comments on
the PAD and SD1, study requests, requests for cooperating agency
status, and all communications to and from Commission staff related to
the merits of the potential application must be filed with the
Commission.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
all documents using the Commission's eFiling system at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/FERCOnline.aspx. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/QuickComment.aspx. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support. In lieu
of electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy. Submissions sent via
the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via any other carrier
must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
All filings must clearly identify the project name and docket number on
the first page: Chandler Mountain Pumped Storage Project (P-15229-001).
    All filings with the Commission must bear the appropriate heading:
``Comments on Pre-Application Document,'' ``Study Requests,''
``Comments on Scoping Document 1,'' ``Request for Cooperating Agency
Status,'' or ``Communications to and from Commission Staff.'' Any
individual or entity interested in submitting study requests,
commenting on the PAD or SD1, and any agency requesting cooperating
status must do so by August 12, 2023.
    p. Scoping Process. In accordance with the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA), Commission staff will prepare either an
environmental assessment (EA) or an environmental impact statement
(EIS) (collectively referred to as the ``NEPA document''). The NEPA
document will consider both site-specific and cumulative environmental
effects, and reasonable alternatives to the proposed action. The
Commission's scoping process will help determine the required level of
analysis and satisfy the NEPA scoping requirements, irrespective of
whether the Commission prepares an EA or EIS.

Scoping Meetings

    Commission staff will hold two public scoping meetings to receive
input on the scope of the environmental issues that should be analyzed
in the NEPA document. The daytime scoping meeting will focus on
resource agency, Native American Tribes, and non-governmental
organization (NGO) concerns, while the evening scoping meeting will
focus on receiving input from the public. We invite all interested
agencies, Native American Tribes, NGOs, and individuals to attend one
of these meetings to assist us in identifying the scope of
environmental issues that should be analyzed in the NEPA document.
Additionally, as noted below, Alabama Power will present a video tour
of the proposed project area, using drone footage, at the scoping
meetings. The dates, times and locations of these meetings are as
follows:

Daytime Scoping Meeting

    Date: Monday, July 10, 2023.
    Time: 2:00 p.m.-4:00 p.m. CDT.
    Place: Rainbow City Community Center.
    Address: 3702 Rainbow Drive, Rainbow City, Alabama 35906.

Evening Scoping Meeting

    Date: Monday, July 10, 2023.
    Time: 6:00 p.m.-8:00 p.m. CDT.
    Place: Rainbow City Community Center.
    Address: 3702 Rainbow Drive, Rainbow City, Alabama 35906.

Virtual Video Tour of the Chandler Mountain Project Area

    A video tour using drone footage will be shown during both the
Daytime and Evening Scoping Meetings.
    Copies of SD1, outlining the subject areas to be addressed in the
NEPA document, were distributed to the individuals and entities on the
Commission's mailing list, as well as Alabama Power's distribution
list, including 462 potentially interested landowners. Copies of SD1
will be available at the scoping meetings, or may be viewed on the web
at http://www.ferc.gov, using the ``eLibrary'' link. Follow the
directions for accessing information in paragraph n. Based on all oral
and written comments, a Scoping Document 2 (SD2) may be issued. SD2 may
include a revised process plan and schedule, as well as a list of
issues, based on the scoping process.

Environmental Site Review

    The applicant and Commission staff will conduct an environmental
site review of the proposed project. All interested agencies, Native
American Tribes, NGOs, and individuals are invited to attend. All
participants are responsible for their own transportation and must wear
closed-toe shoes/boots for walking in uneven/sloped terrain around the
proposed project area. If you plan to attend the environmental site
review, please contact Dave Anderson with Alabama Power at (205) 257-
1398, or via email at [email protected], on or before
June 28, 2023. If calling to RSVP, stakeholders should provide their
name, phone number, and an email address. The time and location of the
environmental site review is as follows:

Chandler Mountain Project On-Site Environmental Site Review

Date: Tuesday, July 11, 2023
Time: 9:00 to 11:00 a.m. (CDT); meeting time will be 8:45 a.m.
Place: The location to meet for the Environmental Site Review will be
provided to those that RSVP. Space is limited.

Meeting Objectives

    At the scoping meetings, Commission staff will: (1) initiate
scoping of the issues; (2) review and discuss existing conditions; (3)
review and discuss existing information and identify preliminary
information and study needs; (4) review and discuss the

process plan and schedule for pre-filing activity that incorporates the
time frames provided for in part 5 of the Commission's regulations and,
to the extent possible, maximizes coordination of Federal, State, and
Tribal permitting and certification processes; and (5) discuss the
potential of any Federal or State agency or Native American Tribe to
act as a cooperating agency for development of an environmental
document. Meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their
issues and/or concerns. Please review the PAD in preparation for the
scoping meetings. Directions on how to obtain a copy of the PAD and SD1
are included in item n of this document.

Meeting Procedures

    The meetings will be recorded by a court reporter and become part
of the Commission's formal record on the project.
    Agencies, Native American Tribes, NGOs, and individuals with
environmental expertise and concerns are encouraged to attend the
meetings and to assist Commission staff in defining and clarifying the
issues to be addressed in the NEPA document.

    Dated: June 13, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-13072 Filed 6-16-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 240 (Friday, December 14, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64341-64342]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27155]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0605; FRL-9987-41]

Request for Comments on the Experts Nominated To Be Considered
for Ad Hoc Participation and Possible Membership on the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals
(SACC)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is requesting public review and welcomes comments on the
scientific experts nominated to be considered for ad hoc participation
and possible membership on the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC). Nominations that were
received in response to a prior notice are being considered for ad hoc
participation on an as needed basis for the TSCA SACC's peer reviews of
the EPA's risk evaluations for chemical substances addressed under the
TSCA. In addition, all nominees are under consideration for TSCA SACC
membership to fulfill short term needs when a vacancy occurs on the
chartered Committee.

DATES: Submit comments on or before January 14, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0605, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Todd Peterson, DFO, Office of
Science Coordination and Policy (7201M), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. This action may,
however, be of interest to persons who are or may be required to
conduct testing and risk evaluations of chemical substances under the
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Since other entities may also be
interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action.

B. List of Nominees and Affiliations

    Brief biographical sketches of nominees to be considered for ad hoc
participation and possible membership on the TSCA SACC are posted on
the TSCA SACC website at http://www.epa.gov/tsca-peer-review or may be
obtained from the OPPT Docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments regarding nominees
for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. If your comments contain any information that
you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected, please contact the DFO
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT to obtain special
instructions before submitting your comments.
    2. Comments regarding nominees to be considered for ad hoc
participation and possible membership on the TSCA SACC. As part of the
broader process for developing a pool of candidates, the Office of
Science Coordination and Policy (OSCP) staff solicited nominations from
the public and stakeholder communities of prospective candidates for
service as ad hoc reviewers and possibly members of TSCA SACC
(``Request for Nominations of Experts To Consider for ad hoc
Participation and Possible Membership on the Toxic Substances Control
Act (TSCA), Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC)'', Federal
Register 83:178 (September 13, 2018) p. 46487).
    The list of nominees to be considered for ad hoc participation and
possible membership on the TSCA SACC will be posted on the TSCA SACC
website at http://www.epa.gov/tsca-peer-review or may be obtained from
the OPPT Docket at http://www.regulations.gov. EPA requests that the
public provide information on the nominees that will assist the Agency
when selecting ad hoc participants and members for the TSCA SACC.
    All comments must be provided to the docket number EPA-HQ-OPPT-
2018-0605 on or before January 14, 2019. Please follow the instructions
for electronic submission of comments to the docket available at http://www.regulations.gov. Questions should be directed to the DFO listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT on or before January 14, 2019.

II. Background

    The Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals (SACC) was established
by EPA in 2016 under the authority of the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical
Safety for the 21st Century Act, Public Law 114-182, 140 Stat. 448
(2016), and operates in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (FACA) of 1972. The SACC supports activities under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq., the Pollution
Prevention Act (PPA), 42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq., and other applicable
statutes. The SACC provides independent scientific advice and
recommendations to the EPA on the scientific and technical aspects of
risk assessments, methodologies, and pollution prevention measures and
approaches for chemicals regulated under TSCA.
    The SACC is comprised of experts in: Toxicology; environmental risk
assessment; exposure assessment; and related sciences (e.g., synthetic
biology, pharmacology, biotechnology, nanotechnology, biochemistry,
biostatistics, PBPK modeling, computational toxicology, epidemiology,
environmental fate, and environmental engineering and sustainability).
The SACC currently consists of 26 members. When needed, the committee
will be assisted in their reviews by ad hoc reviewers with specific
expertise in the topics under consideration.
    Through a prior Federal Register notice (``Request for Nominations
of Experts to Consider for ad hoc Participation and Possible Membership
on the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), Science Advisory Committee
on Chemicals (SACC)'' (83 FR 46487, September 13, 2018), EPA sought
nominations to create a pool of experts who can be available to the
SACC to assist in reviews conducted by the Committee. EPA anticipates
selecting experts from this pool, as needed, to assist the SACC in
their review of EPA's risk evaluations for the chemical substances
addressed under the TSCA: 1,4-Dioxane, Asbestos; Cyclic Aliphatic
Bromide Cluster (HBCD); 1-Bromopropane; Perchloroethylene;
Trichloroethylene; Carbon Tetrachloride; Methylene Chloride; and n-
Methylpyrolidone.
    In addition, EPA anticipates selecting from this pool of experts,
as needed, to appoint SACC members to fulfill short term needs when a
vacancy occurs on the Committee due to resignation or reasons other
than expiration of a term.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2625 et seq.; 5 U.S.C. Appendix 2 et seq.

    Dated: December 7, 2018.
Stanley Barone, Jr.,
Acting Director, Office of Science Coordination and Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-27155 Filed 12-13-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P