[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 53 (Tuesday, March 21, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14433-14437]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05515]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 91

[Docket No.: FAA-2011-0246; Amdt. No. 91-321C]
RIN 2120-AK99

Extension of the Prohibition Against Certain Flights in the
Tripoli (HLLL) Flight Information Region (FIR)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action extends the prohibition of flight operations in
the Tripoli (HLLL) Flight Information Region (FIR) by all U.S. air
carriers; U.S. commercial operators; persons exercising the privileges
of an airman certificate issued by the FAA, except when such persons
are operating a U.S.-registered aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and
operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except operators of such
aircraft that are foreign air carriers. The extension of the expiration
date is necessary due to continued hazards to persons and aircraft
engaged in such flight operations. This Special Federal Aviation
Regulation (SFAR) will now remain in effect until March 20, 2019.

DATES: This final rule is effective on March 16, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Filippell, Air Transportation
Division, AFS-220, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Executive Summary

    This action extends the prohibition of flight operations in the
Tripoli (HLLL) FIR by all U.S. air carriers; U.S. commercial operators;
persons exercising the privileges of a U.S. airman certificate, except
when such persons are operating a U.S.-registered aircraft for a
foreign air carrier; and operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft,
except when such operators are foreign air carriers. The FAA finds this
action necessary due to continued hazards to persons and aircraft
engaged in such flight operations. The prohibition, which is scheduled
to remain in effect until March 20, 2017, will now remain in effect
until March 20, 2019.

II. Legal Authority and Good Cause

A. Legal Authority

    The FAA is responsible for the safety of flight in the United
States (U.S.) and for the safety of U.S. civil operators, U.S.-
registered civil aircraft, and U.S.-certificated airmen throughout the
world. The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found
in title 49, U.S. Code. Subtitle I, sections 106(f) and (g) describe
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII of title 49,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. Section 40101(d)(1) provides that the Administrator shall
consider in the public interest, among other matters, assigning,
maintaining, and enhancing safety and security as the highest
priorities in air commerce. Section 40105(b)(1)(A) requires the
Administrator to exercise his authority consistently with the
obligations of the U.S. Government under international agreements.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, subpart III, section 44701, General requirements.
Under that section, the FAA is charged broadly with promoting safe
flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing, among other
things, regulations and minimum standards for practices, methods, and
procedures that the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air
commerce and national security.
    This regulation is within the scope of FAA's authority under the
statutes cited previously, because it continues to prohibit the persons
subject to paragraph (a) of 14 CFR 91.1603, (SFAR No. 112), from
conducting flight operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR due to the
continued hazards to the safety of such persons' flight operations,

as described in the Background section of this document.

B. Good Cause for Immediate Adoption

    Section 553(b)(3)(B) of title 5, U.S. Code, authorizes agencies to
dispense with notice and comment procedures for rules when the agency
for ``good cause'' finds that those procedures are ``impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' Section 553(d) also
authorizes agencies to forgo the delay in effective date for good cause
found and published with the rule. In this instance, the FAA finds an
immediate need to address the continued hazard to U.S. civil aviation
due to threats from political instability and associated militant/
terrorist activity that exists in the Tripoli (HLL) FIR. This hazard is
further described in the Background section of this rule.
    Because the circumstances described herein warrant a continuation
of the flight restrictions imposed by SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, the
FAA finds that notice and public comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B),
and a delay in the effective date described in 5 U.S.C. 553(d), are
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. The FAA also finds
that this action is fully consistent with the obligations under 49
U.S.C. 40105 to ensure that the FAA exercises its duties consistently
with the obligations of the United States under international
agreements.

III. Background

    The significant threat, identified when the FAA published its most
recent extension of the expiration date of SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR
91.1603,\1\ to U.S. civil aviation operating in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR
continues, due to threats from political instability and associated
militant/terrorist activity. Libya continues to experience a fluid
conflict environment involving heavily-armed elements that are equipped
with a variety of anti-aircraft-capable weapons and that have
demonstrated the capability and intent to target aviation interests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 80 FR 15503, March 24, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of safety and national security concerns regarding
flight operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, the FAA issued SFAR No.
112, 14 CFR 91.1603, in March 2011,\2\ prohibiting all U.S. air
carriers; U.S. commercial operators; persons exercising the privileges
of an airman certificate issued by the FAA, except when such persons
are operating a U.S.-registered aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and
operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except operators of such
aircraft that are foreign air carriers, from conducting flight
operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, except as provided in paragraphs
(c) and (d) of the regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 76 FR 16238, March 23, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, was issued, an armed conflict
was ongoing in Libya and presented a hazard to U.S. civil aviation. The
FAA was concerned that runways at Libya's international airports,
including the main international airports serving Benghazi (HLLB) and
Tripoli (HLLT), might be damaged or degraded. There was also concern
that air navigation services in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR might be
unavailable or degraded. In addition, the proliferation of air defense
weapons, including Man-Portable Air-Defense Systems (MANPADS), and the
presence of military operations, including Libyan aerial bombardments
and unplanned military flights entering and departing the Tripoli
(HLLL) FIR, posed a hazard to U.S. operators, U.S.-registered civil
aircraft, and FAA-certificated airmen that might operate in the Tripoli
(HLLL) FIR. Additionally, the United Nations Security Council adopted
Resolution 1973 on March 18, 2011, which mandated a ban on all flights
in the airspace of Libya, with certain exceptions.
    By March 2014, although former Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi's
regime had been overthrown and the UN-mandated ban on flights in Libyan
airspace had been lifted, the FAA continued to have significant
security concerns for Libya and for the safety of U.S. civil aviation
operations in that country. On March 20, 2014, the FAA extended the
expiration date of SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, to March 20, 2015.\3\
The FAA considered that, on December 12, 2013, the Department of State
had issued a Travel Warning strongly advising against all non-essential
travel to Libya. Various groups had called for attacks against U.S.
citizens and U.S. interests in Libya. As a consequence of the
unpredictable security environment, a hazard to U.S.-registered civil
aircraft, U.S. operators, and FAA-certificated airmen still existed.
Additionally, many military-grade weapons remained in the hands of
private individuals and groups, among them anti-aircraft weapons that
could be used against civil aviation, including MANPADS. The Travel
Warning also warned that closures or threats of closures of the
international airports occurred regularly for maintenance, labor, or
security-related reasons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 79 FR 15679, March 20, 2014, corrected at 79 FR 19288, April
8, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By March 2015, the FAA continued to have significant concerns
regarding the safety of U.S. civil aviation operations in the Tripoli
(HLLL) FIR at all altitudes due to the hazardous situation created by
the ongoing fighting involving various militant groups and Libyan
military forces in various areas of Libya, including some near Tripoli
and Benghazi. Islamist militant groups held and controlled significant
portions of Western Libya, including Tripoli International Airport
(HLLT). Militant groups, such as Libyan Dawn, possessed a variety of
anti-aircraft weapons, which gave them the capability to target
aircraft upon landing and departure and at higher altitudes. Civil
aviation infrastructure continued to be at risk from indirect fire from
mortars and rockets targeting Libyan airports during the ongoing
fighting. Civil aviation in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR was also at risk
from aerial combat operations and other military activity conducted by
Libyan forces. Further, the security situation in the Tripoli (HLLL)
FIR continued to be unpredictable and unstable. For these reasons, the
FAA extended the expiration date of SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, from
March 20, 2015, to March 20, 2017.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 80 FR 15503, March 24, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA continues to assess the situation in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR
as being hazardous for U.S. civil aviation. The newly-established
interim government does not control vast amounts of Libyan territory,
security conditions remain unstable throughout the country, and
fighting could flare with little or no warning as various elements vie
for political influence and territorial control. Anti-aircraft-capable
weapons remain a continuing threat, as demonstrated by the July 2016
shoot down of a military helicopter near Benghazi.
    Therefore, since there is a significant continuing risk to the
safety of U.S. civil aviation in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR, the FAA
extends the expiration date of SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, from March
20, 2017, to March 20, 2019, to maintain the prohibition on flight
operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR by all U.S. air carriers; U.S.
commercial operators; persons exercising the privileges of an airman
certificate issued by the FAA, except when such persons are operating a
U.S.-registered aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and operators of
U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except when such operators are foreign
air carriers.
    The FAA will continue to actively monitor the situation and, based
on evaluations, determine the extent to

which U.S. civil operators may be able to safely operate in the Tripoli
(HLLL) FIR in the future. Amendments to SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603,
may be appropriate if the risk to aviation safety and security changes.
The FAA may amend or rescind SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR 91.1603, as
necessary, prior to its expiration date.

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct that each
Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its
costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354),
as codified in 5 U.S.C. 603 et seq., requires agencies to analyze the
economic impact of regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the
Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39, 19 U.S.C. Chapter 13)
prohibits agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing
U.S. standards, the Trade Agreements Act requires agencies to consider
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4), as codified in 2 U.S.C. 1532, requires agencies to
prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects
of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to
result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more
annually (adjusted for inflation with a base year of 1995). This
portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of the economic
impacts of this final rule.
    In conducting these analyses, FAA has determined this final rule is
a ``significant regulatory action,'' as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, as it raises novel policy issues contemplated
under that Executive Order. The rule is also ``significant'' as defined
in DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures. The final rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, will not create unnecessary obstacles to international trade,
and will not impose an unfunded mandate on State, local, or tribal
governments, or on the private sector.

A. Regulatory Evaluation

    Department of Transportation (DOT) Order 2100.5 prescribes policies
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations.
If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed or final rule
does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits a statement to
that effect and the basis for it to be included in the preamble if a
full regulatory evaluation of the costs and benefits is not prepared.
Such a determination has been made for this final rule. The reasoning
for this determination follows.
    This rule extends, by an additional two years, SFAR No. 112, 14 CFR
91.1603. Due to the conditions in Libya at the time that SFAR No. 112,
14 CFR 91.1603, was issued, the FAA believed the rule would impose only
minimal cost because few, if any, operators subject to the rule were
operating in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR. The FAA has again determined that
the costs of continuing to prohibit U.S. civil flights in the Tripoli
(HLLL) FIR are minimal. The FAA finds that the costs to the few
operators who might wish to operate in the Tripoli FIR are exceeded by
the benefits of avoiding the loss of life, injuries, and property
damage that could be caused by the significant hazards to U.S. civil
aviation detailed in the Background section of this rule.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

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

C. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to this Act, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards.
    The FAA has assessed the effect of this final rule and determined
that its purpose is to protect the safety of U.S. civil aviation from
hazards outside the U.S. Therefore, the rule is in compliance with the
Trade Agreements Act.

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $155 million in lieu of $100
million.
    This final rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore, the
requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) requires that
the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the public. The FAA has determined that
there is no new requirement for information collection associated with
this final rule.

F. International Compatibility and Cooperation

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has
determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices
that correspond to this regulation.

G. Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1F identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 5-6.6f of this order and involves no
extraordinary circumstances.
    The FAA has reviewed the implementation of the SFAR and determined
it is categorically excluded from further environmental review
according to FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.6f. The FAA has examined possible
extraordinary circumstances and determined that no such circumstances
exist. After careful and thorough consideration of the action, the FAA
finds that this Federal action does not require preparation of an
Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement in
accordance with the requirements of NEPA, Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations, and FAA Order 1050.1F.

V. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA analyzed this final rule under the principles and criteria
of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency has determined that
this action would not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
or the relationship between the Federal Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government, and, therefore, would not have Federalism
implications.

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    The FAA analyzed this final rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The agency has determined that it
would not be a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order
and would not be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.

C. Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation

    Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation, (77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012) promotes international
regulatory cooperation to meet shared challenges involving health,
safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues and to reduce,
eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements. The FAA has analyzed this action under the policies and
agency responsibilities of Executive Order 13609, and has determined
that this action would have no effect on international regulatory
cooperation.

VI. Additional Information

A. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    An electronic copy of rulemaking documents may be obtained from the
Internet by--

 Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);
 Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies; or
 Accessing the Government Publishing Office's Web page at
http://www.fdsys.gov.

    Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please
identify the docket or amendment number of this rulemaking in your
request.
    Except for classified material, all documents the FAA considered in
developing this rule, including economic analyses and technical
reports, may be accessed from the Internet through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal referenced above.

B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(SBREFA) requires FAA to comply with small entity requests for
information or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations
within its jurisdiction. A small entity with questions regarding this
document may contact its local FAA official, or the persons listed
under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the beginning of
the preamble. To find out more about SBREFA on the Internet, visit
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91

    Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, Airports, Aviation safety,
Freight, Libya.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:

PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES

0
1. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 1155, 40101, 40103, 40105,
40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712,
44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507,
47122, 47508, 47528-47531, 47534, articles 12 and 29 of the
Convention on International Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180), (126
Stat. 11).

0
2. Revise Sec.  91.1603 to read as follows:

Sec.  91.1603  Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 112--Prohibition
Against Certain Flights in the Tripoli (HLLL) Flight Information Region
(FIR).

    (a) Applicability. This section applies to the following persons:
    (1) All U.S. air carriers and U.S. commercial operators;
    (2) All persons exercising the privileges of an airman certificate
issued by the FAA, except when such persons are operating a U.S.-
registered aircraft for a foreign air carrier; and
    (3) All operators of U.S.-registered civil aircraft, except
operators of such aircraft that are foreign air carriers.
    (b) Flight prohibition. Except as provided in paragraphs (c) and
(d) of this section, no person described in paragraph (a) of this
section may conduct flight operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR.
    (c) Permitted operations. This section does not prohibit persons
described in paragraph (a) of this section from conducting flight
operations in the Tripoli (HLLL) FIR under the following conditions:
    (1) Flight operations are conducted under a contract, grant, or
cooperative agreement with a department, agency, or instrumentality of
the U.S. government (or under a subcontract between the prime
contractor of the department, agency, or instrumentality, and the
person described in paragraph (a) of this section), with the approval
of the FAA,

or under an exemption issued by the FAA. The FAA will process requests
for approval or exemption in a timely manner, with the order of
preference being: First, for those operations in support of U.S.
government-sponsored activities; second, for those operations in
support of government-sponsored activities of a foreign country with
the support of a U.S. government department, agency, or
instrumentality; and third, for all other operations.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (d) Emergency situations. In an emergency that requires immediate
decision and action for the safety of the flight, the pilot in command
of an aircraft may deviate from this section to the extent required by
that emergency. Except for U.S. air carriers and commercial operators
that are subject to the requirements of 14 CFR part 119, 121, 125, or
135, each person who deviates from this section must, within 10 days of
the deviation, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays,
submit to the nearest FAA Flight Standards District Office a complete
report of the operations of the aircraft involved in the deviation,
including a description of the deviation and the reasons for it.
    (e) Expiration. This Special Federal Aviation Regulation will
remain in effect until March 20, 2019. The FAA may amend, rescind, or
extend this Special Federal Aviation Regulation as necessary.

    Issued in Washington, DC, under the authority of 49 U.S.C.
106(f), 40101(d)(1), 40105(b)(1)(A), and 44701(a)(5), on March 15,
2017.
Victoria B. Wassmer,
Acting Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-05515 Filed 3-16-17; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 238 (Monday, December 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77218-77219]
[FR Doc No: 2011-31718]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP12-19-000]

Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Application

    Take notice that on November 21, 2011, Dominion Transmission, Inc.
(DTI), 120 Tredegar Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219 filed an
application in Docket No. CP12-19-000 pursuant to Section 7(c) of the
Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the Commission's Regulations, for
a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct and
operate its Tioga Area Expansion Project. DTI's proposal would consist
of 15 miles of new 24-inch-diameter pipeline (TL-610 Ext. 1), including
a new pig launcher/receiver site at the southern terminus of the new
pipeline, in Tioga County, Pennsylvania (PA). Additionally, DTI's
proposal would include other system modifications at existing stations
on DTI's system such as connecting pipeline, a new meter and regulator
station, new or modified control valves and station piping. These
various modifications are proposed at the Little Greenlick, Crayne,
Boom, Finnefrock, and Lindley Stations in Potter, Greene, Tioga, and
Clinton Counties PA and Steuben County, New York, respectively.
    DTI states that it will provide expanded firm natural gas
transportation services of 270,000 Dth/day for Shell Energy North
America and Penn Virginia Oil & Gas Company. The receipt points for the
expanded service would be at points in Potter and Tioga Counties, PA
and the delivery points through an existing interconnection between DTI
and Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Company's facilities in Clinton
County, PA and through a new interconnection with Texas Eastern
Transmission, LP in Greene County, PA. The estimated cost of the Tioga
Area Expansion Project is approximately $67 million. A more detailed
description of the project is available in the application which is on
file with the Commission and open for public inspection.
    This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``e-Library'' 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_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for
TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Any questions regarding this application should be
directed to Matthew R. Bley, Manager, Gas Transmission Certificates,
Dominion Transmission, Inc., 701 East Cary Street, Richmond, Virginia
23219,<PHONE_NUMBER> (phone),<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax) or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either complete
its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's
public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of
Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the
Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify
federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all
necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal
authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission
staff's EA.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made in the proceeding with the Commission
and must mail a copy to the applicant and

to every other party. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court
review of Commission orders in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    Protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper; see, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the
instructions on the Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing'' link.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings.
    Comment Date: December 27, 2011.

    Dated: December 5, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-31718 Filed 12-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 16 (Tuesday, January 25, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4264-4266]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1440]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0031; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-135-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2C10
(Regional Jet Series 700, 701, & 702), CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series
705), and CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:

    There have been two reported cases of failure of the MLG [main
landing gear] piston axle, P/N [part number] 49203-3 or 49203-5,
resulting from fretting between the inboard axle sleeve and axle
thrust face, damage to the protective coating and consequent stress
corrosion. In both cases, the MLG did not collapse.
* * * * *

    The unsafe condition is failure of the MLG, which could adversely
affect the airplane's safe landing. The proposed AD would require
actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in
the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 11, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://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: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec
H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You
may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Yates, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury,
New York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2011-0031;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-135-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2010-15, dated May 13, 2010 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''),
to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI
states:

    There have been two reported cases of failure of the MLG [main
landing gear] piston axle, P/N [part number] 49203-3 or 49203-5,
resulting from fretting between the inboard axle sleeve and axle
thrust face, damage to the protective coating and consequent stress
corrosion. In both cases, the MLG did not collapse.
    In order to avoid future axle failures, which could potentially
result in gear collapse and collateral damage, this directive
mandates repetitive visual inspection [for damage and corrosion of
the protective coating] and repair as necessary, of the MLG piston
axles, P/N 49203-3 and 49203-5.

The unsafe condition is failure of the MLG, which could adversely
affect the airplane's safe landing. You may obtain further information
by examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Bombardier has issued Service Bulletin 670BA-32-023, Revision C,
dated January 29, 2009, including Appendix A, Revision B, dated March
5, 2008. The actions described in this service information are intended
to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a Note within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 380 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take about 22 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per
work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed
AD on U.S. operators to be $710,600, or $1,870 per product.

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.
    We are 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

    We 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. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

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

    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]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Bombardier, Inc.: Docket No. FAA-2011-0031; Directorate Identifier
2010-NM-135-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by March 11, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2C10
(Regional Jet Series 700, 701 & 702), and CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet
Series 705) and CL-600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes;
certificated in any category.

    Note 1: This AD is not applicable to piston axles having part
number (P/N) 49203-7 or P/N 49203-9, which were installed in
production on Bombardier, Inc. Model CL-600-2C10 airplanes having
serial numbers (S/Ns) 10266 and subsequent; and Models CL-600-2D15
and CL-600-2D24 airplanes having S/Ns 15155 and subsequent.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32: Landing
Gear.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    There have been two reported cases of failure of the MLG [main
landing gear] piston axle, P/N 49203-3 or 49203-5, resulting from
fretting between the inboard axle sleeve and axle thrust face,
damage to the protective coating and consequent stress corrosion. In
both cases, the MLG did not collapse.
* * * * *
The unsafe condition is failure of the MLG, which could adversely
affect the airplane's safe landing.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Inspection and Repair

    (g) Inspect to determine whether the airplane has a main landing
gear piston axle having P/N 49203-3 or 49203-5. A review of airplane
maintenance records is acceptable in lieu of this inspection if the
part number of the main landing gear piston axle can be conclusively
determined from that review.
    (h) Except as required by paragraph (i) of this AD, if, during
the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD, the landing
gear piston axle is determined to have P/N 49203-3 or 49203-5: At
the applicable time specified in paragraph (h)(1), (h)(2), or (h)(3)
of this AD, do a detailed inspection for corrosion and damage of the
inboard and outboard piston axles, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-
023, Revision C, dated January 29, 2009. Before further flight,
repair any corrosion or damage found, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-
023, Revision C, dated January 29, 2009. Within 30 months after the
initial inspection, or within 12 months after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later, do the inspection specified in this
paragraph; and repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 30 months.
    (1) For any piston axle that has been in service for 48 months
or more as of the effective date of this AD: Inspect within 12
months after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For any piston axle that has been in service for 24 months
or more, but less than 48 months, as of the effective date of this
AD: Inspect within 24 months after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) For any piston axle that has been in service for less than
24 months as of the effective date of this AD: Inspect within 36
months after the effective date of this AD.
    (i) For airplanes that have mark ``32-45'' in the MOD STATUS
field of the piston axle nameplate, or that have incorporated one of
the Bombardier repair engineering orders (REOs) listed in paragraph
1.D of Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-023, Revision C, dated
January 29, 2009: Within 12 months after the effective date of this
AD, do the inspection specified in paragraph (h) of this AD, and
repeat the inspection thereafter at the time specified in paragraph
(h) of this AD.

Terminating Action

    (j) Installing a piston axle having P/N 49203-7 or P/N 49203-9
on any airplane constitutes a terminating action for the
requirements of paragraphs (h), (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) of this
AD, for that airplane.

Credit for Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Service
Information

    (k) Inspections and repairs accomplished before the effective
date of this AD according to any service bulletin specified in table
1 of this AD, are considered acceptable for compliance with the
inspections and repairs specified in paragraph (h) of this AD.

   Table 1--Credit for Accomplishment of Previous Service Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Document                Revision                Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bombardier Service Bulletin    Original........  October 24, 2007.
 670BA-32-023.
Bombardier Service Bulletin    A...............  January 7, 2008.
 670BA-32-023.
Bombardier Service Bulletin    B...............  March 5, 2008.
 670BA-32-023.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA AD Differences

    Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (l) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Program
Manager, Continuing Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600
Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone 516-
228-7300; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. 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. The AMOC approval letter
must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: A Federal agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a
person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information
displays a current valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number
for this information collection is 2120-0056. Public reporting for
this collection of information is estimated to be approximately 5
minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
completing and reviewing the collection of information. All
responses to this collection of information are mandatory. Comments
concerning the accuracy of this burden and suggestions for reducing
the burden should be directed to the FAA at: 800 Independence Ave.,
SW., Washington, DC 20591, Attn: Information Collection Clearance
Officer, AES-200.

Related Information

    (m) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2010-15,
dated May 13, 2010; and Bombardier Service Bulletin 670BA-32-023,
Revision C, dated January 29, 2009; for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington on January 13, 2011.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-1440 Filed 1-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 130 (Tuesday, July 8, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38601-38605]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15817]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. IC-31143; File No. 812-14195]

Solar Capital Ltd., et al.; Notice of Application

July 1, 2014

ACTION: Notice of application for an order under sections 17(d) and
57(i) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') and rule 17d-
1 under the Act to permit certain joint transactions otherwise
prohibited by sections 17(d) and 57(a)(4) of the Act and rule 17d-1
under the Act.

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

SUMMARY OF APPLICATION:  Applicants request an order to permit a
business development company (``BDC'') and certain closed-end
management investment companies to co-invest in portfolio companies
with each other and with affiliated investment funds.

APPLICANTS:  Solar Capital Ltd. (``Solar Capital''), Solar Senior
Capital Ltd. (``Solar Senior'', and together with Solar Capital, the
``Solar Funds''), and Solar Capital Partners, LLC (the ``Adviser'').

FILING DATES:  The application was filed on August 5, 2013, and amended
on December 18, 2013, April 7, 2014, June 12, 2004, and July 1, 2014.

HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING:  An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally
or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on July 25, 2014, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
St. NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants: 500 Park Avenue, New
York, NY 10022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jaea F. Hahn, Senior Counsel, at (202)
551-6870 or Dalia Osman Blass, Assistant Chief Counsel, at (202) 551-
6821 (Chief Counsel's Office, Division of Investment Management).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's Web site by searching for the file number, or for an
applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Applicants' Representations

    1. The Solar Funds are Maryland corporations organized as closed-
end management investment companies that have elected to be regulated
as BDCs under section 54(a) of the Act.\1\ Both Solar Funds invest
primarily in US middle market companies. Solar Capital's Objectives and
Strategies \2\ are to generate both current income and capital
appreciation through debt and equity investments. Solar Senior's
Objectives and Strategies are to maximize current income consistent
with the preservation of capital. A majority of the directors of each
of the Regulated Funds is or will be persons who are not ``interested
persons'' as defined in section 2(a)(19) of the Act (``Non-Interested
Directors''). Solar Capital and Solar Senior share a board of directors
(``Board'') comprised of five

directors, three of whom are Non-Interested Directors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section 2(a)(48) defines a BDC to be any closed-end
investment company that operates for the purpose of making
investments in securities described in sections 55(a)(1) through
55(a)(3) of the Act and makes available significant managerial
assistance with respect to the issuers of such securities.
    \2\ ``Objectives and Strategies'' means a Regulated Fund's
investment objectives and strategies, as described in the Regulated
Fund's registration statement on Form N-2, other filings the
Regulated Fund has made with the Commission under the Securities Act
of 1933 (the ``Securities Act''), or under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, and the Regulated Fund's reports to shareholders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The Adviser, a privately held investment adviser registered with
the Commission pursuant to section 203 of the Investment Advisers Act
of 1940 (``Advisers Act''), was organized as a limited liability
company under the laws of the state Delaware. The Adviser serves as the
investment adviser to each Solar Fund.
    3. Applicants seek an order (``Order'') to permit a Regulated Fund
\3\ and one or more other Regulated Funds and one or more Affiliated
Funds \4\ to (a) co-invest with each other in securities issued by
issuers in private placement transactions in which an Adviser
negotiates terms in addition to price; \5\ and (b) make additional
investments in securities of such issuers, including through the
exercise of warrants, conversion privileges, and other rights to
purchase securities of the issuers (``Follow-On Investments'') through
a proposed co-investment program (the ``Co-Investment Program'') where
such participation would otherwise be prohibited under section 17(d) or
section 57(a)(4) and the rules under the Act. ``Co-Investment
Transaction'' means any transaction in which a Regulated Fund (or its
``Wholly-Owned Investment Sub,'' as defined below) participated
together with one or more other Regulated Funds and/or one or more
Affiliated Funds in reliance on the requested Order. ``Potential Co-
Investment Transaction'' means any investment opportunity in which a
Regulated Fund (or its Wholly-Owned Investment Sub) could not
participate together with one or more other Regulated Funds and/or one
or more Affiliated Funds without obtaining and relying on the Order.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Regulated Fund'' refers to the Solar Funds and the Future
Regulated Funds. ``Future Regulated Fund'' means any closed-end
management investment company (a) that is registered under the Act
or has elected to be regulated as BDC, and (b) whose investment
adviser is the Adviser.
    \4\ An ``Affiliated Fund'' means an entity (a) whose investment
adviser is the Adviser, and (b) that would be an investment company
but for section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act. No Affiliated Funds
exist at this time.
    \5\ The term ``private placement transactions'' means
transactions in which the offer and sale of securities by the issuer
are exempt from registration under the Securities Act.
    \6\ All existing entities that currently intend to rely upon the
requested Order have been named as applicants. Any other existing or
future entity that subsequently relies on the Order will comply with
the terms and conditions of the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. Applicants state that a Regulated Fund may, from time to time,
form a Wholly-Owned Investment Sub.\7\ Such a subsidiary would be
prohibited from investing in a Co-Investment Transaction with any other
Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund because it would be a company
controlled by its parent Regulated Fund for purposes of section
57(a)(4) and rule 17d-1. Applicants request that each Wholly-Owned
Investment Sub be permitted to participate in Co-Investment
Transactions in lieu of its parent Regulated Fund and that the Wholly-
Owned Investment Sub's participation in any such transaction be
treated, for purposes of the Order, as though the parent Regulated Fund
were participating directly. Applicants represent that this treatment
is justified because a Wholly-Owned Investment Sub would have no
purpose other than serving as a holding vehicle for the Regulated
Fund's investments and, therefore, no conflicts of interest could arise
between the Regulated Fund and the Wholly-Owned Investment Sub. The
Regulated Fund's Board would make all relevant determinations under the
conditions with regard to a Wholly-Owned Investment Sub's participation
in a Co-Investment Transaction, and the Regulated Fund's Board would be
informed of, and take into consideration, any proposed use of a Wholly-
Owned Investment Sub in the Regulated Fund's place. If the Regulated
Fund proposes to participate in the same Co-Investment Transaction with
any of its Wholly-Owned Investment Subs, the Board will also be
informed of, and take into consideration, the relative participation of
the Regulated Fund and the Wholly-Owned Investment Sub.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The term ``Wholly-Owned Investment Sub'' means an entity (a)
whose sole business purpose is to hold one or more investments on
behalf of a Regulated Fund (and, in the case of an SBIC Subsidiary
(as defined below), maintain a license under the SBA Act (as defined
below) and issue debentures guaranteed by the SBA (as defined
below)); (b) that is wholly-owned by the Regulated Fund (with the
Regulated Fund at all times holding, beneficially and of record,
100% of the voting and economic interests); (c) with respect to
which the Regulated Fund's Board has the sole authority to make all
determinations with respect to the entity's participation under the
conditions of the application; and (d) that would be an investment
company but for section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act. All
subsidiaries of the Regulated Fund participating in the Co-
Investment Transactions will be Wholly-Owned Investment Subs and
will have Objectives and Strategies that are either the same as, or
a subset of, the Regulated Fund's Objectives and Strategies. The
term ``SBIC Subsidiary'' means a Wholly-Owned Investment Sub that is
licensed by the Small Business Administration (the ``SBA'') to
operate under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended
(the ``SBA Act'') as a small business investment company (an
``SBIC'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. When considering Potential Co-Investment Transactions for any
Regulated Fund, the Adviser will consider only the Objectives and
Strategies, investment policies, investment positions, capital
available for investment, and other pertinent factors applicable to
that Regulated Fund. The Adviser expects that any portfolio company
that is an appropriate investment for a Regulated Fund should also be
an appropriate investment for one or more other Regulated Funds and/or
one or more Affiliated Funds, with certain exceptions based on
available capital or diversification.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Regulated Funds, however, will not be obligated to
invest, or co-invest, when investment opportunities are referred to
them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Other than pro rata dispositions and Follow-On Investments as
provided in conditions 7 and 8, and after making the determinations
required in conditions 1 and 2(a), the Adviser will present each
Potential Co-Investment Transaction and the proposed allocation to the
directors of the Board eligible to vote under section 57(o) of the Act
(``Eligible Directors''), and the ``required majority,'' as defined in
section 57(o) of the Act (``Required Majority'') \9\ will approve each
Co-Investment Transaction prior to any investment by the participating
Regulated Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ In the case of a Regulated Fund that is a registered closed-
end fund, the Board members that make up the Required Majority will
be determined as if the Regulated Fund were a BDC subject to Section
57(o).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. With respect to the pro rata dispositions and Follow-On
Investments provided in conditions 7 and 8, a Regulated Fund may
participate in a pro rata disposition or Follow-On Investment without
obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if, among other
things: (i) The proposed participation of each Regulated Fund and each
Affiliated Fund in such disposition is proportionate to its outstanding
investments in the issuer immediately preceding the disposition or
Follow-On Investment, as the case may be; and (ii) the Board of the
Regulated Fund has approved that Regulated Fund's participation in pro
rata dispositions and Follow-On Investments as being in the best
interests of the Regulated Fund. If the Board does not so approve, any
such disposition or Follow-On Investment will be submitted to the
Regulated Fund's Eligible Directors. The Board of any Regulated Fund
may at any time rescind, suspend or qualify its approval of pro rata
dispositions and Follow-On Investments with the result that all
dispositions and/or Follow-On Investments must be submitted to the
Eligible Directors.
    8. No Non-Interested Director of a Regulated Fund will have a
direct or indirect financial interest in any Co-Investment Transaction
(other than

indirectly through share ownership in one of the Regulated Funds),
including any interest in any company whose securities would be
acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction.

Applicants' Legal Analysis

    1. Section 57(a)(4) of the Act prohibits certain affiliated persons
of a BDC from participating in joint transactions with the BDC or a
company controlled by a BDC in contravention of rules as prescribed by
the Commission. Under section 57(b)(2) of the Act, any person who is
directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under common
control with a BDC is subject to section 57(a)(4). Applicants submit
that each of the Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds could be deemed
to be a person related to each Regulated Fund in a manner described by
section 57(b) by virtue of being under common control. Section 57(i) of
the Act provides that, until the Commission prescribes rules under
section 57(a)(4), the Commission's rules under section 17(d) of the Act
applicable to registered closed-end investment companies will be deemed
to apply to transactions subject to section 57(a)(4). Because the
Commission has not adopted any rules under section 57(a)(4), rule 17d-1
also applies to joint transactions with Regulated Funds that are BDCs.
Section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act are applicable to
Regulated Funds that are registered closed-end investment companies.
    2. Section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act prohibit
affiliated persons of a registered investment company from
participating in joint transactions with the company unless the
Commission has granted an order permitting such transactions. In
passing upon applications under rule 17d-1, the Commission considers
whether the company's participation in the joint transaction is
consistent with the provisions, policies, and purposes of the Act and
the extent to which such participation is on a basis different from or
less advantageous than that of other participants.
    3. Applicants state that in the absence of the requested relief,
the Regulated Funds would be, in some circumstances, limited in their
ability to participate in attractive and appropriate investment
opportunities. Applicants believe that the proposed terms and
conditions will ensure that the Co-Investment Transactions are
consistent with the protection of each Regulated Fund's shareholders
and with the purposes intended by the policies and provisions of the
Act. Applicants state that the Regulated Funds' participation in the
Co-Investment Transactions will be consistent with the provisions,
policies, and purposes of the Act and on a basis that is not different
from or less advantageous than that of other participants.

Applicants' Conditions

    Applicants agree that the Order will be subject to the following
conditions:
    1. Each time the Adviser considers a Potential Co-Investment
Transaction for another Regulated Fund or an Affiliated Fund that falls
within a Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies, the
Adviser will make an independent determination of the appropriateness
of the investment for the Regulated Fund in light of the Regulated
Fund's then-current circumstances.
    2. (a) If the Adviser deems a Regulated Fund's participation in any
Potential Co-Investment Transaction to be appropriate for the Regulated
Fund, the Adviser will then determine an appropriate level of
investment for the Regulated Fund.
    (b) If the aggregate amount recommended by the Adviser to be
invested by the applicable Regulated Fund in the Potential Co-
Investment Transaction together with the amount proposed to be invested
by the other participating Regulated Funds and Affiliated Funds,
collectively, in the same transaction, exceeds the amount of the
investment opportunity, the investment opportunity will be allocated
among them pro rata based on each participant's capital available for
investment in the asset class being allocated, up to the amount
proposed to be invested by each. The Adviser will provide the Eligible
Directors of each participating Regulated Fund with information
concerning each participating party's available capital to assist the
Eligible Directors with their review of the Regulated Fund's
investments for compliance with these allocation procedures.
    (c) After making the determinations required in conditions 1 and
2(a), the Adviser will distribute written information concerning the
Potential Co-Investment Transaction (including the amount proposed to
be invested by each Regulated Fund and each Affiliated Fund) to the
Eligible Directors of each participating Regulated Fund for their
consideration. A Regulated Fund will co-invest with another Regulated
Fund or an Affiliated Fund only if, prior to the Regulated Fund's
participation in the Potential Co-Investment Transaction, a Required
Majority concludes that:
    (i) The terms of the Potential Co-Investment Transaction, including
the consideration to be paid, are reasonable and fair to the Regulated
Fund and its shareholders and do not involve overreaching in respect of
the Regulated Fund or its shareholders on the part of any person
concerned;
    (ii) the Potential Co-Investment Transaction is consistent with:
    (A) the interests of the Regulated Fund's shareholders; and
    (B) the Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies;
    (iii) the investment by any other Regulated Funds or any Affiliated
Funds would not disadvantage the Regulated Fund, and participation by
the Regulated Fund would not be on a basis different from or less
advantageous than that of any other Regulated Funds or any Affiliated
Funds; provided that, if any other Regulated Fund or any Affiliated
Fund, but not the Regulated Fund itself, gains the right to nominate a
director for election to a portfolio company's board of directors or
the right to have a board observer or any similar right to participate
in the governance or management of the portfolio company, such event
shall not be interpreted to prohibit the Required Majority from
reaching the conclusions required by this condition (2)(c)(iii), if:
    (A) the Eligible Directors will have the right to ratify the
selection of such director or board observer, if any; and
    (B) the Adviser agrees to, and does, provide periodic reports to
the Board of the Regulated Fund with respect to the actions of such
director or the information received by such board observer or obtained
through the exercise of any similar right to participate in the
governance or management of the portfolio company; and
    (C) any fees or other compensation that any Regulated Fund or any
Affiliated Fund or any affiliated person of any Regulated Fund or any
Affiliated Fund receives in connection with the right of a Regulated
Fund or an Affiliated Fund to nominate a director or appoint a board
observer or otherwise to participate in the governance or management of
the portfolio company will be shared proportionately among the
participating Affiliated Funds (who may each, in turn, share its
portion with its affiliated persons) and the participating Regulated
Funds in accordance with the amount of each party's investment; and
    (iv) the proposed investment by the Regulated Fund will not benefit
the Adviser, the other Regulated Funds, the Affiliated Funds or any
affiliated person of any of them (other than the parties to

the Co-Investment Transaction), except (A) to the extent permitted by
condition 13, (B) to the extent permitted by section 17(e) or 57(k) of
the Act, as applicable, (C) indirectly, as a result of an interest in
the securities issued by one of the parties to the Co-Investment
Transaction, or (D) in the case of fees or other compensation described
in condition 2(c)(iii)(C).
    3. Each Regulated Fund has the right to decline to participate in
any Potential Co-Investment Transaction or to invest less than the
amount proposed.
    4. The Adviser will present to the Board of each Regulated Fund, on
a quarterly basis, a record of all investments in Potential Co-
Investment Transactions made by any of the other Regulated Funds or
Affiliated Funds during the preceding quarter that fell within the
Regulated Fund's then-current Objectives and Strategies that were not
made available to the Regulated Fund, and an explanation of why the
investment opportunities were not offered to the Regulated Fund. All
information presented to the Board pursuant to this condition will be
kept for the life of the Regulated Fund and at least two years
thereafter, and will be subject to examination by the Commission and
its staff.
    5. Except for Follow-On Investments made in accordance with
condition 8, a Regulated Fund will not invest in reliance on the Order
in any issuer in which another Regulated Fund, Affiliated Fund, or any
affiliated person of another Regulated Fund or Affiliated Fund is an
existing investor.
    6. A Regulated Fund will not participate in any Potential Co-
Investment Transaction unless the terms, conditions, price, class of
securities to be purchased, settlement date, and registration rights
will be the same for each participating Regulated Fund and Affiliated
Fund. The grant to another Regulated Fund or an Affiliated Fund, but
not the Regulated Fund, of the right to nominate a director for
election to a portfolio company's board of directors, the right to have
an observer on the board of directors or similar rights to participate
in the governance or management of the portfolio company will not be
interpreted so as to violate this condition 6, if conditions
2(c)(iii)(A), (B) and (C) are met.
    7. (a) If any Regulated Fund or an Affiliated Fund elects to sell,
exchange or otherwise dispose of an interest in a security that was
acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction, the Adviser will:
    (i) Notify each Regulated Fund that participated in the Co-
Investment Transaction of the proposed disposition at the earliest
practical time; and
    (ii) formulate a recommendation as to participation by each
Regulated Fund in the disposition.
    (b) Each Regulated Fund will have the right to participate in such
disposition on a proportionate basis, at the same price and on the same
terms and conditions as those applicable to the participating Regulated
Funds and Affiliated Funds.
    (c) A Regulated Fund may participate in such disposition without
obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if: (i) The proposed
participation of each Regulated Fund and each Affiliated Fund in such
disposition is proportionate to its outstanding investments in the
issuer immediately preceding the disposition; (ii) the Board of the
Regulated Fund has approved as being in the best interests of the
Regulated Fund the ability to participate in such dispositions on a pro
rata basis (as described in greater detail in the application); and
(iii) the Board of the Regulated Fund is provided on a quarterly basis
with a list of all dispositions made in accordance with this condition.
In all other cases, the Adviser will provide its written recommendation
as to the Regulated Fund's participation to the Regulated Fund's
Eligible Directors, and the Regulated Fund will participate in such
disposition solely to the extent that a Required Majority determines
that it is in the Regulated Fund's best interests.
    (d) Each Regulated Fund and each Affiliated Fund will bear its own
expenses in connection with any such disposition.
    8. (a) If a Regulated Fund or an Affiliated Fund desires to make a
Follow-On Investment in a portfolio company whose securities were
acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction, the Adviser will:
    (i) Notify each Regulated Fund that participated in the Co-
Investment Transaction of the proposed transaction at the earliest
practical time; and
    (ii) formulate a recommendation as to the proposed participation,
including the amount of the proposed Follow-On Investment, by each
Regulated Fund.
    (b) A Regulated Fund may participate in such Follow-On Investment
without obtaining prior approval of the Required Majority if: (i) The
proposed participation of each Regulated Fund and each Affiliated Fund
in such investment is proportionate to its outstanding investments in
the issuer immediately preceding the Follow-On Investment; and (ii) the
Board of the Regulated Fund has approved as being in the best interests
of the Regulated Fund the ability to participate in Follow-On
Investments on a pro rata basis (as described in greater detail in the
application). In all other cases, the Adviser will provide its written
recommendation as to the Regulated Fund's participation to the Eligible
Directors, and the Regulated Fund will participate in such Follow-On
Investment solely to the extent that a Required Majority determines
that it is in the Regulated Fund's best interests.
    (c) If, with respect to any Follow-On Investment:
    (i) The amount of a Follow-On Investment is not based on the
Regulated Funds' and the Affiliated Funds' outstanding investments
immediately preceding the Follow-On Investment; and
    (ii) the aggregate amount recommended by the Adviser to be invested
by each Regulated Fund in the Follow-On Investment, together with the
amount proposed to be invested by the participating Affiliated Funds in
the same transaction, exceeds the amount of the opportunity; then the
amount invested by each such party will be allocated among them pro
rata based on each party's capital available for investment in the
asset class being allocated, up to the amount proposed to be invested
by each.
    (d) The acquisition of Follow-On Investments as permitted by this
condition will be considered a Co-Investment Transaction for all
purposes and subject to the other conditions set forth in the
application.
    9. The Non-Interested Directors of each Regulated Fund will be
provided quarterly for review all information concerning Potential Co-
Investment Transactions and Co-Investment Transactions, including
investments made by other Regulated Funds and the Affiliated Funds that
the Regulated Fund considered but declined to participate in, so that
the Non-Interested Directors may determine whether all investments made
during the preceding quarter, including those investments which the
Regulated Fund considered but declined to participate in, comply with
the conditions of the Order. In addition, the Non-Interested Directors
will consider at least annually the continued appropriateness for the
Regulated Fund of participating in new and existing Co-Investment
Transactions.
    10. Each Regulated Fund will maintain the records required by
section 57(f)(3) of the Act as if each of the Regulated Funds were a
business development company and each of the investments permitted
under these conditions were approved by the

Required Majority under section 57(f) of the Act.
    11. No Non-Interested Director of a Regulated Fund will also be a
director, general partner, managing member or principal, or otherwise
an ``affiliated person'' (as defined in the Act) of an Affiliated Fund.
    12. The expenses, if any, associated with acquiring, holding or
disposing of any securities acquired in a Co-Investment Transaction
(including, without limitation, the expenses of the distribution of any
such securities registered for sale under the Securities Act) will, to
the extent not payable by the Adviser under the investment advisory
agreements with the Regulated Funds and the Affiliated Funds, be shared
by the Affiliated Funds and the Regulated Funds in proportion to the
relative amounts of the securities held or to be acquired or disposed
of, as the case may be.
    13. Any transaction fee (including break-up or commitment fees but
excluding broker's fees contemplated by section 17(e) or 57(k) of the
Act, as applicable), received in connection with a Co-Investment
Transaction will be distributed to the participating Regulated Funds
and Affiliated Funds on a pro rata basis based on the amounts they
invested or committed, as the case may be, in such Co-Investment
Transaction. If any transaction fee is to be held by the Adviser
pending consummation of the transaction, the fee will be deposited into
an account maintained by the Adviser at a bank or banks having the
qualifications prescribed in section 26(a)(1) of the Act, and the
account will earn a competitive rate of interest that will also be
divided pro rata among the participating Regulated Funds and Affiliated
Funds based on the amounts they invest in such Co-Investment
Transaction. None of the Affiliated Funds, the Adviser, the other
Regulated Funds or any affiliated person of the Regulated Funds or
Affiliated Funds will receive additional compensation or remuneration
of any kind as a result of or in connection with a Co-Investment
Transaction (other than (a) in the case of the Regulated Funds and the
Affiliated Funds, the pro rata transaction fees described above and
fees or other compensation described in condition 2(c)(iii)(C); and (b)
in the case of the Adviser, investment advisory fees paid in accordance
with the agreements between the Adviser and the Regulated Funds or the
Affiliated Funds.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-15817 Filed 7-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 228 (Tuesday, November 29, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 73395]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26052]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2022-0161]

Pipeline Safety: Informational Public Meeting Addressing Multiple
Safety Topics Including Methane Emission Reduction, Safety Bulletins,
and NTSB Recommendations

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: Notice of an informational public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces an informational public meeting to
address multiple safety topics including progress on reduction of
methane emissions, energy transformation, safety bulletins, and
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommendations. PHMSA will
also webcast the in-person public meeting in Houston, Texas, which is
scheduled for December 13-15, 2022.

DATES: The informational public meeting will be held on December 13-15,
2022, from 8:30 a.m. until 4:30 p.m., CT at the Westin Galleria, in
Houston, Texas. Members of the public who wish to attend this meeting
are asked to register no later than December 7, 2022. Individuals
requiring accommodations, such as sign language interpretation or other
aids, are asked to notify Jessica Appel by email at
[email protected] no later than November 30, 2022. PHMSA will
also webcast this meeting. For additional information, please see the
ADDRESSES section of this notice.

ADDRESSES: The informational public meeting will be held at: Westin
Galleria Houston, 5060 West Alabama Street, Houston, Texas. The agenda
and instructions on how to attend are available on the meeting website
at https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/meetings/MtgHome.mtg?mtg=161.
    Presentations from the informational public meeting will be
available on the meeting website no later than 5 business days
following the meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Daugherty by email at
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The mission of PHMSA is to protect people and the environment by
advancing the safe transportation of energy products and other
hazardous materials that are essential to our daily lives. PHMSA's
mission includes prevention of the release of natural gas which
releases methane into the atmosphere. PHMSA is aggressively pursuing
the DOT Strategic Goals of Safety, Climate & Sustainability, and
Transformation in efforts to be profiled during the informational
public meeting. PHMSA will discuss with the public and industry how it
is improving safety by issuing advisory bulletins based on lessons
learned from events like the geohazard related failure which threatened
the community of Satartia, Mississippi, and the crude oil spill
following an anchor strike on an offshore pipeline near Long Beach,
California. PHMSA will also discuss recent learnings related to hard
spot analyses and challenges presented by pipeline flow reversals. The
meeting will highlight technology transformations to combat climate
change and keep aging pipeline infrastructure safe for use in
transporting energy of the future.
    Additionally, the NTSB recently recommended that PHMSA revise its
regulations for potential impact radius (PIR) calculations and this
meeting will provide the Agency an opportunity to gather input from
both industry and public stakeholders. Ensuring PIR calculations fully
consider the potential impacts to congested urban areas is particularly
important and supports efforts to ensure equitable safety protections
for all people.
    The informational public meeting will continue a dialogue on the
Agency's climate and energy transformation efforts, such as reducing
methane emissions, and PHMSA's current role regarding carbon dioxide
and hydrogen pipelines. PHMSA anticipates further discussion on these
important matters in 2023.
    The overall purpose of the informational public meeting is to share
important safety information with the public and industry as well as
gather input to inform future rulemaking decisions.

II. Informational Public Meeting Details and Agenda

    The informational public meeting will take place in-person December
13-15, 2022, in Houston, Texas. During the meeting, PHMSA will review a
variety of topics and invite participant input. Following opening
remarks, the webinar will address the following topics: (1) Recent and
Potential Safety Advisories (Geohazard/Land Movement, Maritime Issues,
Hard Spots, Flow Reversals); (2) The Future: Technology and New
Regulatory Requirements (Technology Transfer: Innovative Tools That Can
Be Used by Industry and PHMSA's New Regulation Implementation Process);
(3) Failure Investigation Forum (Overview of Recent Accidents/Incidents
and Common Enforcement Items Found During Incidents); (4) Potential
Impact Radius (Discussion of Incident and NTSB Recommendation); and (5)
The Future: Climate and Energy Transformation (Reducing Methane
Emissions, Hydrogen and Hydrogen Blending, Carbon Dioxide/Carbon
Capture, Utilization, and Storage.)

III. Public Participation

    The informational meeting will be open to the public. Members of
the public who wish to attend are requested to register on the meeting
website and include their names and organization affiliation (see
ADDRESSES). PHMSA is committed to providing all participants with equal
access to these meetings. If you need special accommodations, please
contact Jessica Appel by email at [email protected].
    PHMSA is not always able to publish a notice in the Federal
Register quickly enough to provide timely notification regarding last
minute changes that impact a previously announced meeting. Therefore,
individuals should check the meeting website listed in the ADDRESSES
section of this notice regarding any possible changes.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 23, 2022, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2022-26052 Filed 11-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P