			  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on February 9, 2004

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST 2004-17045

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Applicant:  VOLGA-DNEPR J.S. CARGO AIRLINE
        Date Filed:  February 4, 2004

Relief requested:  Exemption from 49 U.S.C. section 40109(g) to permit
the applicant to operate, on behalf of Space Systems Loral, one, one-way
cargo charter flight from Moffet Field, California, to Cape Canaveral,
Florida, during the period February 10-11, 2004, using its AN-124-100
aircraft.  The cargo to be carried is one Space Systems Loral satellite
and associated equipment.  The applicant stated that Space Systems Loral
needs prompt shipment of this cargo to Cape Canaveral to complete a
tight production and launch schedule, that the cargo is too large for
transportation on U.S.-carrier aircraft; and that surface transportation
is not feasible because of the large size, delicate nature and high
value of the cargo.

Applicant representative:  Glenn P. Wicks,<PHONE_NUMBER>         DOT
analyst:  Allen F. Brown,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  Volga-Dnepr served its application on those U.S.
carriers operating large all-cargo aircraft.  Each carrier indicated
that it did not have aircraft available to conduct the proposed
operation and that it had no comment or did not oppose grant of the
requested authority.

Statutory Standards:  Under 49 U.S.C. section 40109(g), we may authorize
a foreign air carrier to carry commercial traffic between U.S. points
(i.e., cabotage traffic) under limited circumstances.  Specifically, we
must find that the authority is required in the public interest; that
because of an emergency created by unusual circumstances not arising in
the normal course of business the traffic cannot be accommodated by U.S.
carriers holding certificates under 49 U.S.C. section 41102; that all
possible efforts have been made to place the traffic on U.S. carriers;
and that the transportation is necessary to avoid unreasonable hardship
to the traffic involved (an additional required finding, concerning
emergency transportation during labor disputes, was not relevant here).

        DISPOSITION

Action: Approved
                                             Action date:  February 9,
2004

Effective dates of authority granted:  February 9, 2004, through
February 11, 2004

Basis for approval:  We are granting Volga-Dnepr’s request to operate
its proposed one-way flight from Moffet Field to Cape Canaveral, through
February 11, 2004.  We found that its request met all the relevant
criteria of 49 U.S.C. section 40109(g) for the grant of an exemption of
this type and that the grant was required in the public interest.
Specifically, we were persuaded that the need to move the cargo promptly
in order to meet the urgent production and launch schedule, the fact
that the cargo could not be transported by surface transportation
because of its large size, delicate nature and high value, the potential
negative impact of delivery delay; and the unique, outsized nature of
the cargo, constituted an emergency not arising in the normal course of
business.  Moreover, based on the representations of the U.S. carriers,
we concluded that no U.S. carrier had aircraft available that could be
used to conduct the operations at issue here.  We also found that grant
of this authority would prevent unreasonable hardship to Space Systems
Loral.  Finally, we found that the applicant was qualified to perform
its proposed operation.

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to our
standard exemption conditions and to the condition that the applicant
must comply with an FAA-approved flight routing for the authorized
operation.

Action taken by:        Karan K. Bhatia

                                  Assistant Secretary

                     for Aviation and International Affairs

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp


[Federal Register: October 25, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 206)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 60604-60606]
[DOCID:fr25oc07-27]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0053; Directorate Identifier 98-ANE-54-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; General Electric Company CF6-50, -80A1/
A3, and -80C2A Series Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) for General Electric Company (GE) CF6-50, -80A1/A3, and
-80C2A series turbofan engines, installed on Airbus A300 and A310
series airplanes. That AD currently requires initial and repetitive
inspections and checks of the thrust reverser actuation systems. This
proposed AD would require revised inspection thresholds and intervals,
and would require the same actions and additional inspections of the
thrust reverser actuation system locking features. This proposed AD
results from refined safety analyses performed on the thrust reverser
systems by GE and Airbus. We are proposing this AD to prevent
inadvertent in-flight thrust reverser deployment, which can result in
loss of control of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive any comments on this proposed AD by December 24,
2007.

ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to comment on this
proposed AD.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov
 and follow the instructions for sending your

comments electronically.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Contact Middle River Aircraft Systems, Mail Point 46, 103
Chesapeake Park Plaza, Baltimore, MD, 21220, attn: Warranty Support,
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> for the service
information identified in this proposed AD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Green, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12
New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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-2007-0053;
Directorate Identifier 98-ANE-54-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
with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD.

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
the same as the Mail address provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

Discussion

    The FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 by superseding AD 99-18-
20, Amendment 39-11286 (64 FR 48286, September 3, 1999). That AD
requires initial and repetitive inspections and checks of the thrust
reverser actuation systems, and allows extended repetitive inspection
intervals if an optional double p-seal configuration is installed. That
AD was the result of a report of a higher than anticipated center drive
unit cone brake failure rate, which reduces the overall thrust reverser
system protection against inadvertent deployment. That condition, if
not corrected, could result in inadvertent in-flight thrust reverser
deployment, which can result in loss of control of the airplane.

Actions Since AD 99-18-20 Was Issued

    Since AD 99-18-20 was issued, refined safety analyses performed on
the thrust reverser systems installed on GE CF6-50, -80A1/A3, and -
80C2A series turbofan engines were completed by GE and Airbus.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed and approved the technical contents of Middle
River Aircraft Systems (MRAS) Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. CF6-50
S/B 78A3001, Revision 4, dated August 30, 2007, ASB No. CF6-80A1/A3 S/B
78A1002, Revision 5, dated July 19, 2007, and ASB No. CF6-80C2A1/A2/A3/
A5/A8/A5F S/B 78A1015, Revision 7, dated August 30, 2007. These ASBs
describe procedures for performing initial and repetitive thrust
reverser system inspections and checks.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other products
of this same type design. For that reason, we are proposing this AD,
which would require revised inspection thresholds and intervals, and
would require inspections of the thrust reverser actuation system
locking features. The proposed AD would require that you do these
actions using the relevant service information described previously.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 206 engines
installed on airplanes of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would
take about one work-hour per engine to perform the proposed additional
inspection, and that the average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Based
on these figures, we estimate the total additional cost of the proposed
AD for one inspection of the U.S. fleet, to be $28,000.

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.

Docket Number Change

    We are transferring the docket for this proposed AD to the Federal
Docket Management System (FDMS) as part of our on-going docket
management consolidation efforts. The new Docket No. is FAA-2007-0053.
The old Docket No. became the Directorate Identifier, which is 98-ANE-
54-AD.

Regulatory Findings

    We have 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 that the proposed AD:
    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. 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.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD. See the ADDRESSES section for a location
to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the
Federal Aviation Administration 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 removing Amendment 39-11286 (64 FR
48286, September 3, 1999) and by adding a new airworthiness directive
to read as follows:

General Electric Company: Docket No. FAA-2007-0053; Directorate
Identifier 98-ANE-54-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must receive
comments on this airworthiness directive (AD) action by December 24,
2007.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 99-18-20, Amendment 39-11286.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to General Electric Company (GE) CF6-50, -
80A1/A3, and -80C2A series turbofan engines. These engines are
installed on Airbus A300 and A310 series airplanes.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from refined safety analyses performed on
the thrust reverser systems by GE and Airbus. We are issuing this AD
to prevent inadvertent in-flight thrust reverser deployment, which
can result in loss of control of the airplane.

Compliance

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

Initial Inspection for CF6-50 Series Turbofan Engines

    (f) For CF6-50 series turbofan engines, perform initial thrust
reverser inspections using Section 2, Accomplishment Instructions,
of Middle River Aircraft Systems (MRAS) Alert Service Bulletin (ASB)
No. CF6-50 S/B 78A-3001, Revision 4, dated August 30, 2007, as
follows:
    (1) On Airbus A300 series airplanes with a Three Light Reverser
Indication Circuit configuration, and without thrust reverser
actuation system (TRAS) locks installed, perform the initial
inspections and checks within 1,500 hours time-in-service (TIS)
after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) On Airbus A300 series airplanes with a Three Light Reverser
Indication Circuit configuration, and with TRAS locks installed,
perform the initial inspections and checks within 7,000 hours TIS
after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) On Airbus A300 series airplanes with a Two Light Reverser
Indication Circuit configuration, and without TRAS locks installed,
perform the initial inspections and checks within 1,500 hours TIS
after the effective date of this AD.
    (4) On Airbus A300 series airplanes with a Two Light Reverser
Indication Circuit configuration, and with TRAS locks installed,
perform the initial inspections and checks within 7,000 hours TIS
after the effective date of this AD.

Repetitive Inspections for CF6-50 Series Turbofan Engines

    (g) For CF6-50 series turbofan engines, perform repetitive
thrust reverser inspections using Section 2, Accomplishment
Instructions, of MRAS ASB No. CF6-50 S/B 78A-3001, Revision 4, dated
August 30, 2007, as follows:
    (1) On Airbus A300 series airplanes with a Three Light Reverser
Indication Circuit configuration, and without TRAS locks installed,
perform repetitive inspections and checks at the following:
    (i) Within every 2,500 hours time-since-last-inspection (TSLI),
perform paragraph 2.D., Translating Cowl Air Seal, Dagmar Fairing
and Aft Frame Inspection; and paragraph 2.I., Fan Reverser
Operational Check.
    (ii) Within every 6,000 hours TSLI, perform paragraph 2.C.,
Pneumatic Drive Motor (PDM) Disc Brake Holding Torque Check;
paragraph 2.E., Feedback Rod to Yoke Alignment Check and Inspection
of Feedback Yoke and Feedback Rod; paragraph 2.F., Translating Cowl
Auto Re-Stow Function Check; and paragraph 2.I., Fan Reverser
Operational Check.
    (2) Within every 7,000 hours TSLI on Airbus A300 series
airplanes with a Three Light Reverser Indication Circuit
configuration, and with TRAS locks installed, perform repetitive
inspections and checks.
    (3) On Airbus A300 series airplanes with a Two Light Reverser
Indication Circuit configuration, and without TRAS locks installed,
perform repetitive inspections and checks at the following:
    (i) Within every 2,500 hours TSLI, perform paragraph 2.D.,
Translating Cowl Air Seal, Dagmar Fairing and Aft Frame Inspection;
and paragraph 2.I., Fan Reverser Operational Check.
    (ii) Within every 6,000 hours TSLI, perform paragraph 2.C.,
Pneumatic Drive Motor (PDM) Disc Brake Holding Torque Check;
paragraph 2.E., Feedback Rod to Yoke Alignment Check and Inspection
of Feedback Yoke and Feedback Rod; paragraph 2.G., Translating Cowl
Auto Re-Stow Function Check; paragraph 2.H., Over Pressure Shutoff
Valve (OPSOV) Indication Check; and paragraph 2.I., Fan Reverser
Operational Check.
    (4) On Airbus A300 series airplanes with a Two Light Reverser
Indication Circuit configuration, and with TRAS locks installed,
perform repetitive inspections and checks within every 7,000 hours
TSLI.

Initial and Repetitive Inspections for CF6-80A1/A3 Series Turbofan
Engines

    (h) For CF6-80A1/A3 series turbofan engines installed on Airbus
A310-200 airplanes, perform initial and repetitive thrust reverser
inspections using Section 2, Accomplishment Instructions, of MRAS
ASB No. CF6-80A1/A3 S/B 78A-1002, Revision 5, dated July 19, 2007,
at the following:
    (1) For initial inspection, within 1,500 hours TIS after the
effective date of this AD.
    (2) For repetitive inspections, within every 7,000 hours TSLI.

Initial Inspection for CF6-80C2A Series Turbofan Engines

    (i) For CF6-80C2A series turbofan engines, perform initial
thrust reverser inspections using Section 2, Accomplishment

Instructions, of MRAS ASB No. CF6-80C2A1/A2/A3/A5/A8/A5F S/B
78A1015, Revision 7, dated August 30, 2007, at the following:
    (1) On Airbus A300 and A310 series airplanes with left-hand and
right-hand reverser halves that do not have the double/backup P-seal
introduced by MRAS SB No. CF6-80C2 S/B 78A1005, and that do not have
locking actuator assemblies (LAAs) installed, within 600 hours TIS
after the effective date of this AD.
    (2) On Airbus A300 and A310 series airplanes with left-hand and
right-hand reverser halves that have the double/backup P-seal
introduced by MRAS SB No. CF6-80C2 S/B 78A1005, or that have LAAs
installed, within 7,000 hours TIS after the effective date of this
AD.

Directional Pilot Valve (DPV) Pressure Switch Check on Airbus Airplanes
With CF6-80C2A5F Engines Is Not Applicable

    (3) The DPV pressure switch check per paragraph 2.F. is not
applicable to Airbus airplanes with CF6-80C2A5F left-hand and right-
hand fan reverser halves (model ES-CF6-5), because this check is
performed through the full authority digital electronic control
fault detection system.

Repetitive Inspections for CF6-80C2A Series Turbofan Engines

    (j) For CF6-80C2A series turbofan engines, perform repetitive
thrust reverser inspections using Section 2, Accomplishment
Instructions, of MRAS ASB No. CF6-80C2A1/A2/A3/A5/A8/A5F S/B
78A1015, Revision 7, dated August 30, 2007, at the following:
    (1) On Airbus A300 and A310 series airplanes with left-hand and
right-hand reverser halves that do not have the double/backup P-
seal, introduced by MRAS SB No. CF6-80C2 S/B 78A1005, and that do
not have LAAs installed, within every 600 hours TSLI.
    (2) On Airbus A300 and A310 series airplanes with left-hand and
right-hand reverser halves that have the double/backup P-seal,
introduced by MRAS SB No. CF6-80C2 S/B 78A1015, or that have LAAs
installed, within every 7,000 hours TSLI.

Engines That Fail an Inspection or Check

    (k) On engines that fail an inspection or check required by this
AD, perform corrective actions or deactivate the fan reverser per
Section 2, Accomplishment Instructions, of the applicable MRAS ASB,
before further flight.

Previous Credit

    (l) Initial and repetitive inspections and checks of the thrust
reverser actuation systems done before the effective date of this AD
that use the following ASBs, comply with the requirements specified
in this AD:
    (1) MRAS ASB No. CF6-50 S/B 78A-3001, Revision 2, dated December
18, 1997; and MRAS ASB No. CF6-50 S/B 78A-3001, Revision 3, dated
May 3, 2006.
    (2) MRAS ASB No. CF6-80A1/A3 S/B 78A-1002, Revision 3, dated
January 21, 1999; and MRAS ASB No. CF6-80A1/A3 S/B 78A-1002,
Revision 4, dated May 3, 2006.
    (3) MRAS ASB No. CF6-80C2 S/B 78A1015, Revision 5, dated January
21, 1999; and MRAS ASB No. CF6-80C2A1/A2/A3/A5/A8/A5F S/B 78A1015,
Revision 6, dated May 3, 2006.

Alternative Methods of Compliance

    (m) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, has the
authority to approve alternative methods of compliance for this AD
if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (n) France AD 1999-422- IMP(B), dated October 20, 1999, also
addresses the subject of this AD.
    (o) Contact Robert Green, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,

for more information about this AD.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on October 18, 2007.
Francis A. Favara,
Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-21000 Filed 10-24-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 227 (Friday, November 25, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 85160]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28331]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2016-1029]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Northeast Cape Fear River,
Wilmington, NC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the CSX Hilton Railroad Bridge across
the Northeast Cape Fear River, mile 1.5, at Wilmington, NC. This
deviation is necessary to manually operate the bridge and perform
emergency bridge repairs. This deviation allows the bridge to remain in
the closed-to-navigation position.

DATES: This deviation is effective without actual notice from November
25, 2016 through 6 p.m. on December 9, 2016. For the purposes of
enforcement, actual notice will be used from November 18, 2016 at 3:45
p.m., until November 25, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2016-1029] is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH''. Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Hal R. Pitts, Bridge
Administration Branch Fifth District, Coast Guard, telephone 757-398-
6222, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CSX Corporation, owner and operator of
the CSX Hilton Railroad Bridge across the Northeast Cape Fear River,
mile 1.5, in Wilmington, NC, has requested a temporary deviation from
the current operating regulations due to an electrical casualty to the
submarine cable and electrical components caused by Hurricane Matthew.
The bridge is limited to manual operation, which requires personnel to
manually operate components of the bridge in locations where additional
safety measures are required, limiting the bridge to daylight
operations. The bridge is a bascule draw bridge and has a vertical
clearance in the closed position of 4 feet above mean high water.
    The current operating schedule is set out in 33 CFR 117.829(b).
Under this temporary deviation, the bridge will remain in the closed-
to-navigation position and open on signal during daylight hours, if at
least 3 hours notice is given.
    The Northeast Cape Fear River is used by a variety of vessels
including small commercial fishing vessels, recreational vessels and
tugs and barges. The Coast Guard has carefully coordinated the
restrictions with waterway users.
    Vessels able to safely pass through the bridge in the closed
position may do so at any time. The bridge will not be able to open for
emergencies and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to
pass. The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways
through our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in
operating schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange
their transit to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: November 18, 2016.
Hal R. Pitts,
Bridge Program Manager, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2016-28331 Filed 11-23-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: March 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 62)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 16237-16239]
[DOCID:fr31mr06-18]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2005-MD-0014; FRL-8051-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Amendments to the Control of VOC Emissions From Yeast
Manufacturing

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Maryland. This revision pertains to the
amendments of a regulation that controls volatile organic compound
(VOC) emissions from yeast manufacturing facilities. EPA is approving
this SIP revision in accordance with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

DATES: This final rule is effective on May 1, 2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2005-MD-0014. All documents in the docket are listed
in the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the

electronic docket, 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 electronically through http://www.regulations.gov
 or in hard copy for public inspection during normal

business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the
Maryland Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard,
Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland 21230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose Quinto,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by e-
mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On February 6, 2006 (71 FR 6028), EPA published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the State of Maryland. The NPR proposed
approval of the amendments to control VOC emissions from yeast
manufacturing facilities, COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>. The formal SIP revision
was submitted by the Maryland Department of the Environment on October
31, 2005.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    The amendments to COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> are: (1) To reinstate the
requirements for non-nutritional and specialty yeast installations to
meet certain operational requirements to minimize VOC emissions, and
(2) to clarify the 98 percent compliance demonstration is a 12-month
rolling average.
    Other specific requirements of COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> and the rationale
for EPA's proposed action are explained in the NPR and will not be
restated here. No public comments were received on the NPR.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving the amendments to the control of VOC emissions
from yeast manufacturing facilities, COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>, submitted on
October 31, 2005, as a revision to the Maryland SIP.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it 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). This rule also
does not have tribal implications because it will 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, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule
implementing a Federal requirement, and does not alter the relationship
or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the
Clean Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    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 rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    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 May 30, 2006. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule 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 pertaining to Maryland's amendments to the
control of VOC emissions from yeast manufacturing facilities, 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, Ozone, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: March 21, 2006.
William Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart V--Maryland

0
2. In Sec.  52.1070, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entry for COMAR <IP_ADDRESS> to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1070  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                                      EPA-Approved Regulations in the Maryland SIP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     State
  Code of Maryland administrative          Title/subject           effective             EPA approval  date          Additional explanation/ citation at
   regulations (COMAR) citation                                      date                                                       40 CFR 52.1100
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
COMAR 26.11.19....................                                    Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Sources

                                                                      * * * * * * *
COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>.................  Control of Volatile                9/12/05  03/31/06 [Insert page number where
                                     Organic Compound                            the document begins].
                                     Emissions from Yeast
                                     Manufacturing.

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 06-3106 Filed 3-30-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

OFFICE OF

PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 MEMORANDUM

DATE:  	25-MAR-2009

SUBJECT:	Iodosulfuron-Methyl-Sodium in/on Wheat; Revised Response to the
Health Effects Division (HED) Review of 29-OCT-2008 (DP#: 350509).

PC Code:  122021	DP Barcode:  D363431

Decision No.:  388140	Registration No.:  264-IEN

Petition No.:  1F6299	Regulatory Action:  Section 3 Registration

Risk Assessment Type:  NA	Case No.:  NA

TXR No.:  NA	CAS No.:  144550-36-7

MRID Nos.:  47671201-47671202	40 CFR:  §180.580

FROM:	Sarah J. Levy, Chemist

Registration Action Branch 1 (RAB1)/HED (7509P)

THROUGH:	George F. Kramer, Ph.D., Senior Chemist

RAB1/HED (7509P)

TO:		Jim Tompkins/Hope Johnson, RM 25

Registration Division (RD) (7505P)

Executive Summary

This memorandum supersedes the previous HED document (Memo, S. Levy,
18-MAR-2009; DP#: 362191), which did not reflect all of the submitted
residue analytical method data from the registrant.

Bayer CropScience proposed a Section 3 registration for the 5%
water-dispersible granule (WDG) formulation of
iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium (Hussar® Herbicide; EPA File Symbol No.
264-IEN) for use on spring and winter wheat (including durum).  The
product is proposed for postemergence foliar application at a maximum
seasonal application rate of 0.009 lb ai/A, with proposed preharvest
intervals (PHIs) of 55 days for grain and straw.

In conjunction with the requested use, Bayer CropScience submitted a
petition, PP#: 1F6299, for the establishment of permanent tolerances for
the residues of the herbicide iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium (methyl
4-iodo-2-[3-(4-methoxy-6-methyl-l,3,5-triazin-2-yl)ureidosulfonyl]benzoa
te, monosodium salt) in/on the following raw agricultural commodities
(RACs):

Wheat, grain	0.02 ppm

Wheat, forage	0.06 ppm

Wheat, hay	0.05 ppm

Wheat, straw	0.05 ppm

Iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium is a sulfonylurea herbicide intended to
control annual and perennial grass and broadleaf weeds.  In the U.S.,
iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium is registered for use on field corn and for
preplant burndown on soybeans, and it is formulated as 2% and 10% WDG
formulations.  A residential use is registered for
iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium on ornamental turfgrass.  All applications of
this product are to be performed by professional (commercial)
applicators only.

The current petitioner’s amendment addresses residue chemistry
deficiencies relating to PP#: 1F6299, identified in HED’s review of
29-OCT-2008 (Memo, S. Levy; DP#: 350509).

Regulatory Recommendations

A risk assessment was previously completed for PP#: 1F6299 (Memo, S.
Levy et al.; 12-NOV-2008; DP#: 350046).  All residue chemistry
deficiencies relating to PP#: 1F6299 are now resolved.

DETAILED CONSIDERATIONS

860.1200 Directions for Use

Deficiency - 860.1200 Directions for Use (from Memo, S. Levy,
29-OCT-2008; DP#: 350509)

A revised Section B should be submitted to reflect PHIs for wheat forage
and hay of 21 and 50 days, respectively.

Petitioner's Response:  The petitioner submitted a revised Section B.

HED's Conclusion:  HED has received a revised Section B (accepted
11-FEB-2009) which reflects PHIs for wheat forage and hay of 21 and 50
days, respectively.  This deficiency is now resolved.

860.1340 Residue Analytical Methods

Deficiency - 860.1340 Residue Analytical Method - Plant Commodities
(from Memo, S. Levy, 29-OCT-2008; DP#: 350509)

The petitioner should submit additional validation data for the proposed
enforcement method from samples of wheat forage and hay or straw
fortified at the stated limit of quantitation (LOQ) for these
commodities, 0.05 ppm.  In addition, the petitioner should modify Method
BY/02/99 to incorporate the changes recommended by the ILV laboratory.

Petitioner's Response:  The petitioner noted that Method BY/02/99 has
been proposed as the tolerance enforcement method for all crops.  This
method has been adequately validated with corn grain, forage, and
stover.  This method has also been successfully independently validated.
 According to GLN 860.1340, the method only needs to include recovery
data from a representative number of crops, in this case corn.  Corn
matrices are very similar in nature to the wheat matrices and provide an
excellent level of confidence that the method is suitable for both corn
and wheat (and other cereal crops).

The petitioner stated that Method BY/02/99 has been revised to include
the recommendations from the ILV and has been renamed BY/02/99, Revision
1.  The revised method will be provided to the Agency as a separate
document.

HED's Conclusion:  The petitioner adequately demonstrated that the
existing data support the conclusion that method BY/02/99 is a suitable
enforcement method for all cereal crops, including wheat and that no
additional data are necessary.  HED has received an acceptable revised
method (BY/02/99, Revision 1).  The deficiencies relating to residue
analytical methods are now resolved.  The method will now be forwarded
to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for publication in the
Pesticide Analytical Manual (PAM) Volume II.

860.1550 Proposed Tolerances

Deficiency - 860.1550 Proposed Tolerances (from Memo, S. Levy,
29-OCT-2008; DP#: 350509)

The petitioner should propose an increased tolerance of 0.10 ppm for
wheat forage.

Petitioner's Response:  The petitioner submitted a revised Section F.

HED's Conclusion:  HED has received a revised Section F with the
recommended tolerance level of 0.10 ppm for wheat, forage.  This
deficiency is now resolved.

References

Memo, S. Levy, 29-OCT-2008; DP#: 350509

Memo, S. Levy et al.; 12-NOV-2008; DP#: 350046

Memo, S. Levy, 18-MAR-2009; DP#: 362191

cc:  S. Levy (RAB1/HED)

RDI:  G.F. Kramer (03/25/09)

S. Levy:S10953:PY-S:(703)305-0783:7509P:RAB1

Template Version November 2003

Iodosulfuron-methyl-sodium	Response to Previous HED Review	DP#: 363431

Page   PAGE  4  of   NUMPAGES  4

Page   PAGE  1  of   NUMPAGES  4


[Federal Register: March 31, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 62)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 17782]
[DOCID:fr31mr11-8]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 53

[USCG-2009-0239]
RIN 1625-AB33

Protection for Whistleblowers in the Coast Guard

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

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

SUMMARY: On December 21, 2010, the Coast Guard published a direct final
rule that notified the public of the Coast Guard's intent to amend its
``Coast Guard Whistleblower Protection'' regulations to conform to
statutory protections for all members of the Armed Forces. We have not
received an adverse comment, or notice of intent to submit an adverse
comment, on this rule. Therefore, the rule will go into effect as
scheduled.

DATES: The effective date of the direct final rule published December
21, 2010, (75 FR 79956), is confirmed as April 20, 2011.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this rulemaking, USCG-2009-0239, is available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You
may also find this docket on the Internet by going to http://
www.regulations.gov, typing USCG-2009-0239 in the ``Keyword'' box, and
then clicking ``Search.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
e-mail or call Commander Michael Cavallaro, U.S. Coast Guard Office of
General Law, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  On December 21, 2010, we published a direct
final rule entitled ``Protection for Whistleblowers in the Coast
Guard'' in the Federal Register. (75 FR 79956). That rule broadens the
whistleblower protection already afforded uniformed members of the
Coast Guard by conforming Coast Guard regulations to statutory changes
made to broaden whistleblower protections for all members of the Armed
Forces.
    We published the rule as a direct final rule under 33 CFR 1.05-55
because we considered this rule to be noncontroversial and did not
expect an adverse comment regarding this rulemaking. In the direct
final rule we notified the public of our intent to make the rule
effective on April 20, 2011, unless adverse comment or notice of intent
to submit an adverse comment was received on or before February 22,
2011. We have not received any comments, or notice of intent to submit
an adverse comment, on this rulemaking. Therefore the rule will go into
effect as scheduled, on April 20, 2011.

    Dated: March 25, 2011.
F.J. Kenney,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Judge Advocate General.
[FR Doc. 2011-7642 Filed 3-30-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 150 (Monday, August 7, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52158-52160]
[FR Doc No: 2023-16788]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1276-016; ER10-1287-015; ER10-1292-014; ER10-
1303-014; ER10-1319-016; ER10-1353-016; ER18-1150-010; ER18-1183-007;
ER18-1184-007; ER22-2187-003; ER22-2188-004; ER23-1411-001.
    Applicants: Newport Solar LLC, Northwest Ohio IA, LLC, Northwest
Ohio Solar, LLC, Delta Solar Power II, LLC, Delta Solar Power I, LLC,
Trishe Wind Ohio, LLC, Dearborn Industrial Generation, L.L.C., CMS
Generation Michigan Power, LLC, Genesee Power Station Limited
Partnership, CMS Energy Resource Management Company, Grayling
Generation Station Limited Partnership, Consumers Energy Company.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Consumers Energy
Company, et al.
    Filed Date: 7/31/23.
    Accession Number: 20230731-5259.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4589-003.
    Applicants: EcoGrove Wind, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of EcoGrove Wind, LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/28/23.
    Accession Number: 20230728-5240.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-4677-026; ER16-1354-016; ER16-1672-022; ER16-
1913-014; ER18-772-011; ER18-1771-019; ER18-1978-012.
    Applicants: Casa Mesa Wind, LLC, Langdon Renewables, LLC, New
Mexico Wind, LLC, River Bend Solar, LLC, Chaves County Solar, LLC, Live
Oak Solar, LLC, NextEra Energy Montezuma II Wind, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of NextEra Energy Montezuma
II Wind, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 7/31/23.
    Accession Number: 20230731-5257.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-738-011; ER11-3097-015; ER10-1186-014; ER20-
393-001; ER20-392-001.
    Applicants: DTE Stoney Corners Wind Farm, LLC, DTE Garden Wind
Farm, LLC, DTE Energy Supply, LLC, DTE Energy Trading, Inc., DTE
Electric Company.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of DTE Electric Company, et
al.
    Filed Date: 7/27/23.
    Accession Number: 20230727-5211.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/17/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2013-016; ER10-2435-023; ER10-2440-015; ER12-
2510-013; ER12-2512-013; ER15-2014-010; ER15-2020-010; ER15-2022-009;
ER15-2026-009; ER18-2252-005; ER19-481-006.
    Applicants: LMBE Project Company LLC, MC Project Company LLC,
Susquehanna Nuclear, LLC, Montour, LLC, Talen Montana, LLC, Brunner
Island, LLC, H.A. Wagner LLC, Brandon Shores LLC, Dartmouth Power
Associates Limited Partnership, Camden Plant Holdings, L.L.C., Talen
Energy Marketing, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Talen Energy Marketing,
LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 7/31/23.
    Accession Number: 20230731-5260.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1993-002.
    Applicants: CleanChoice Energy, Inc.

    Description: Notice of Change in Status of CleanChoice Energy, Inc.
    Filed Date: 7/31/23.
    Accession Number: 20230731-5256.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-2399-002.
    Applicants: Caden Energix Hickory LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Caden
Energix Hickory LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/31/23.
    Accession Number: 20230731-5254.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-2535-001.
    Applicants: Dichotomy Power Maine, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Dichotomy
Power Maine, LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/31/23.
    Accession Number: 20230731-5251.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-14-001.
    Applicants: Darby Solar, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Darby
Solar, LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/31/23.
    Accession Number: 20230731-5252.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1703-004; ER17-2011-002.
    Applicants: Castleton Commodities Merchant Trading L.P., Salem
Harbor Power Development LP.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Salem Harbor Power
Development LP, et al.
    Filed Date: 7/28/23.
    Accession Number: 20230728-5239.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1928-002; ER22-1945-002.
    Applicants: Bracewell LLP, Powells Creek Farm Solar, LLC, Bracewell
LLP, Salt City Solar LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Salt City Solar LLC, et
al.
    Filed Date: 7/28/23.
    Accession Number: 20230728-5237.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2116-003; ER22-2115-003.
    Applicants: Timber Road Solar Park LLC, Blue Harvest Solar Park
LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Blue
Harvest Solar Park LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 7/31/23.
    Accession Number: 20230731-5253.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2116-004; ER22-2115-004.
    Applicants: Timber Road Solar Park LLC, Blue Harvest Solar Park
LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Blue
Harvest Solar Park LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 7/31/23.
    Accession Number: 20230731-5261.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-884-001.
    Applicants: Sonoran Solar Energy, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Sonoran Solar Energy,
LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/31/23.
    Accession Number: 20230731-5255.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/21/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-937-001.
    Applicants: Chevelon Butte RE LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Chevelon Butte RE LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/28/23.
    Accession Number: 20230728-5234.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/18/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2079-001.
    Applicants: Kentucky Utilities Company.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: KU Errata to Concurrence to the
Amenda JRCA to be effective 8/6/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230801-5175.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/22/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2385-000.
    Applicants: ConocoPhillips Company.
    Description: ConocoPhillips Company submits 2022 WECC Soft Price
Cap Justification Filing.
    Filed Date: 7/7/23.
    Accession Number: 20230707-5272.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/22/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2533-000.
    Applicants: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: PASNY RY1 8-2023 to be
effective 8/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230801-5047.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/22/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2534-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2023-08-01_SA 3473 Ameren
IL-Hickory Point Solar Energy 2nd Rev GIA (J815) to be effective 7/26/
2023.
    Filed Date: 8/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230801-5057.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/22/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2535-000.
    Applicants: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: WDS RY1 8-2023 to be
effective 8/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230801-5061.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/22/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2536-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to Attachment AE
Sections 8.5.9 and 8.6.5 to be effective 10/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230801-5079.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/22/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2537-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2023-08-01 Energy Storage
Enhancements--Phase 2 to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 8/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230801-5092.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/22/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2538-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Notice of Cancellation of Rate
Schedule FERC No. 129 to be effective 7/2/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230801-5112.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/22/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2539-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.,
Indianapolis Power & Light Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Midcontinent Independent
System Operator, Inc. submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2023-
08-01_SA 4145 AES-WVPA MTIA to be effective 8/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230801-5115.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/22/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2540-000.
    Applicants: Energy Prepay II, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Baseline new to be effective
8/2/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230801-5148.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/22/23.

    Docket Numbers: ER23-2541-000.
    Applicants: Nevada Cogeneration Associates #2.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Baseline new to be effective
10/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 8/1/23.
    Accession Number: 20230801-5168.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/22/23.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a
complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with
Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211,
385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the
specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is
necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing

requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    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 [email protected].

    Dated: August 1, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-16788 Filed 8-4-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 17, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2358-2360]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00660]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0895; Product Identifier 2017-SW-048-AD; Amendment
39-19161; AD 2018-02-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bell Helicopter Textron Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for Bell
Helicopter Textron (Bell) Model 204B, 205A, and 205A-1 helicopters with
a Helicopter Technology Company (HTC) main rotor (M/R) blade installed.
This AD requires cleaning and visually inspecting the M/R blades, and
depending on the outcome of the inspection, repairing or replacing the
M/R blades. This AD is prompted by a report of an M/R blade with a
fatigue crack in the grip plate and doublers at the blade retention
bolt hole. The actions of this AD are intended to correct an unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective February 1, 2018.
    We must receive comments on this AD by March 19, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0895; 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 AD, the economic evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations (telephone 800-
647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in
the AD docket shortly after receipt.
    For service information identified in this final rule, contact Bell
Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, TX 76101; telephone
(817) 280-3391; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may review the referenced service information at the FAA,
Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy,
Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Galib Abumeri, Aerospace Engineer
(Structures), Airframe Section, Los Angeles ACO Branch, Compliance and
Airworthiness Division, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California
90712; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not provide you with notice and an opportunity to
provide your comments prior to it becoming effective. However, we
invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written
comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to the
economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that resulted
from adopting this AD. The most helpful comments reference a specific
portion of the AD, explain the reason for any recommended change, and
include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain
duplicate comments, commenters should send only one copy of written
comments, or if comments are filed electronically, commenters should
submit them only one time. We will file in the docket all comments that
we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public
contact with FAA personnel concerning this rulemaking during the
comment period. We will consider all the comments we receive and may
conduct additional rulemaking based on those comments.

Discussion

    We are adopting a new AD for Bell 204B, 205A and 205A-1 helicopters
with an HTC M/R blade part number (P/N) 204P2100-101 installed. This AD
requires repetitive inspections of the exposed areas of the lower grip
pad and upper and lower grip plates of each M/R blade for a crack,
corrosion, an edge void, loose or damaged adhesive squeeze-out, and an
edge delamination.
    The actions of this AD are the same as those required by AD 2016-
22-07 (81 FR 74285, October 26, 2016), which applies to Bell Model
204B, 205A and 205A-1 helicopters with an M/R blade P/N 204-011-200-001
or P/N 204-011-250-(all dash numbers) installed. AD 2016-22-07 was
prompted by a report of an M/R blade with multiple fatigue cracks
around the retention bolt hole.
    This AD is prompted by a report that during a ground inspection, a
crack was discovered in the grip plate and doublers at the blade
retention bolt hole of a UH-1B helicopter model. The blade, which HTC
produced for restricted category and commercial model helicopters, had
926 hours TIS and is of the same design as the M/R blades in AD 2016-
22-07. We are issuing this AD to detect or prevent a crack, which could
lead to failure of an M/R blade and subsequent loss of helicopter
control.

FAA's Determination

    We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of these same type
designs.

Related Service Information

    HTC has issued Service Notice No. 204-2100-1 on July 5, 2017, for
affected helicopters with M/R blade P/N 204P2100-101, serial numbers
A099 through A119 installed. This service notice specifies cleaning and
visually inspecting the M/R blades and depending on the outcome,
repairing or replacing the blades in accordance with AD 2016-23-09.
    We also reviewed Bell Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No.
UH-1H-13-09, dated January 14, 2013, for the Model UH-1H helicopter.
ASB No. UH-1H-13-09 specifies a one-time visual inspection, within 10
hours time-in-service (TIS), of the lower grip pad and upper and lower
grip plates for cracks, edge voids, and loose or damaged adhesive
squeeze-out. ASB No. UH-1H-13-09 also specifies a repetitive and more
detailed visual inspection, daily and at every 150 hours TIS, of the
lower grip pad, upper and lower grip plates, and all upper and the
lower doublers for cracks, corrosion, edge voids, and loose or damaged
adhesive squeeze-out.
    Lastly, we reviewed Bell Helicopter ASB No. 204-75-1 for Model 204B
helicopters and ASB No. 205-75-5 for Model 205A-1 helicopters, both
Revision C and both dated April 25, 1979. ASB No. 204-75-1 and ASB No.
205-75-5 specify visually inspecting

the M/R blades during each daily inspection. ASB No. 204-75-1 and ASB
No. 205-75-5 also provide instructions for repetitively inspecting the
blades every 1,000 hours of operation or every 12 months, whichever
occurs first.

AD Requirements

    This AD requires within 25 hours time-in-service (TIS) or 2 weeks,
whichever occurs first, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 25
hours TIS or 2 weeks, whichever occurs first, cleaning the upper and
lower exposed surfaces of each M/R blade from an area starting at the
butt end of the blade to three inches outboard of the doublers. Using a
3X or higher power magnifying glass and a light, this AD also requires
visually inspecting various M/R blade parts for a crack or corrosion.
If there is a crack, corrosion, an edge void, loose or damaged adhesive
squeeze-out, or an edge delamination, before further flight, this AD
requires repairing the M/R blade or replacing it with an airworthy M/R
blade, depending on whether the condition is within maximum repair
damage limits.
    This AD also requires reporting information about any cracks found
during the inspection to the FAA within 10 days.

Differences Between This AD and the Service Information

    This AD requires all inspections every 25 hours TIS or 2 weeks,
whichever occurs first. ASB 204-75-1 and ASB 205-75-5 call for daily
visual inspections, and inspections, rework, and refinishing every
1,000 hours TIS or 12 months, whichever occurs first. The service
information applies to Bell M/R blade P/N 204-011-250. This AD applies
to HTC M/R blade P/N 204P2100-101.

Interim Action

    We consider this AD to be an interim action. The notification of a
crack in the M/R blade that is required by this AD may enable us to
obtain better insight into the cause of the M/R blade cracking. This
information may help us develop additional action to address this
unsafe condition. Once this action is developed, approved, and
available, we might consider additional rulemaking.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 10 helicopters of U.S. Registry
and that labor costs average $85 per work-hour. Based on these
estimates, we expect the following costs:
     Cleaning and performing all inspections of a set of M/R
blades (2 per helicopter) requires 0.5 work-hour for a cost of $43 per
helicopter and $430 for the U.S. fleet per inspection cycle.
     Replacing an M/R blade requires 12 work-hours and parts
cost $86,000 for a total cost of $87,020 per blade.
     Reporting the inspection results required by this AD will
require about 0.5 work-hour for a cost of $43 per helicopter and $430
for the U.S. fleet per report.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to 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 control
number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting required by this AD
is 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.

FAA's Justification and Determination of the Effective Date

    Providing an opportunity for public comments prior to adopting
these AD requirements would delay implementing the safety actions
needed to correct this known unsafe condition. Therefore, we find that
the risk to the flying public justifies waiving notice and comment
prior to the adoption of this rule because the required corrective
actions must be accomplished within two weeks.
    Since an unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate
adoption of this AD, we determined that notice and opportunity for
prior public comment before issuing this AD are impracticable and that
good cause exists to make this AD effective in less than 30 days.

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 AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed, I certify that this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that
it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    4. 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 an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

     Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
 2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):

2018-02-08 Bell Helicopter Textron: Amendment 39-19161; Docket No.

FAA-2017-0895; Product Identifier 2017-SW-048-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bell Helicopter Textron (Bell) Model 204B,
205A, and 205A-1 helicopters with a Helicopter Technology Company
(HTC) main rotor (M/R) blade part number 204P2100-101 installed,
certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a crack in an M/R blade,
which could result in failure of an M/R blade and subsequent loss of
helicopter control.

(c) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective February 1, 2018.

(d) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(e) Required Actions

    (1) Within 25 hours time-in-service (TIS) or 2 weeks, whichever
occurs first, and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 25 hours TIS
or 2 weeks, whichever occurs first, clean the upper and lower
exposed surfaces of each M/R blade from an area starting at the butt
end of the blade to three inches outboard of the doublers. Using a
3X or higher power magnifying glass and a light, inspect as follows:
    (i) Visually inspect the exposed areas of the lower grip pad and
upper and lower grip plates of each M/R blade for a crack and any
corrosion.
    (ii) On the upper and lower exposed surfaces of each M/R blade
from blade stations 24.5 to 35 for the chord width, visually inspect
each layered doubler and blade skin for a crack and any corrosion.
Pay particular attention for any cracking in a doubler or skin near
or at the same blade station as the blade retention bolt hole (blade
station 28).
    (iii) Visually inspect the exposed areas of each bond line at
the edges of the lower grip pad, upper and lower grip plates, and
each layered doubler (bond lines) on the upper and lower surfaces of
each M/R blade for the entire length and chord width for an edge
void, any corrosion, loose or damaged adhesive squeeze-out, and an
edge delamination. Pay particular attention to any crack in the
paint finish that follows the outline of a grip pad, grip plate, or
doubler, and to any loose or damaged adhesive squeeze-out, as these
may be the indication of an edge void.
    (2) If there is a crack, any corrosion, an edge void, loose or
damaged adhesive squeeze-out, or an edge delamination during any
inspection in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD, before further flight, do
the following:
    (i) If there is a crack in a grip pad or any grip plate or
doubler, replace the M/R blade with an airworthy M/R blade.
    (ii) If there is a crack in the M/R blade skin that is within
maximum repair damage limits, repair the M/R blade. If the crack
exceeds maximum repair damage limits, replace the M/R blade with an
airworthy M/R blade.
    (iii) If there is any corrosion within maximum repair damage
limits, repair the M/R blade. If the corrosion exceeds maximum
repair damage limits, replace the M/R blade with an airworthy M/R
blade.
    (iv) If there is an edge void in the grip pad or in a grip plate
or doubler, determine the length and depth using a feeler gauge.
Repair the M/R blade if the edge void is within maximum repair
damage limits or replace the M/R blade with an airworthy M/R blade.
    (v) If there is an edge void in a grip plate or doubler near the
outboard tip, tap inspect the affected area to determine the size
and shape of the void. Repair the M/R blade if the edge void is
within maximum repair damage limits or replace the M/R blade with an
airworthy M/R blade.
    (vi) If there is any loose or damaged adhesive squeeze-out along
any of the bond lines, trim or scrape away the adhesive without
damaging the adjacent surfaces or parent material of the M/R blade.
Determine if there is an edge void or any corrosion by lightly
sanding the trimmed area smooth using 280 or finer grit paper. If
there is no edge void or corrosion, refinish the sanded area.
    (vii) If there is an edge delamination along any of the bond
lines or a crack in the paint finish, determine if there is an edge
void or a crack in the grip pad, grip plate, doubler, or skin by
removing paint from the affected area by lightly sanding in a span-
wise direction using 180-220 grit paper. If there are no edge voids
and no cracks, refinish the sanded area.
    (viii) If any parent material is removed during any sanding or
trimming in paragraphs (e)(2)(vi) or (e)(2)(vii) of this AD, repair
the M/R blade if the damage is within maximum repair damage limits
or replace the M/R blade with an airworthy M/R blade.
    (3) If there is a crack during any inspection in paragraph
(e)(1) of this AD, within 10 days after completing the inspection,
report the information requested in Appendix 1 to this AD by mail to
the Los Angeles ACO Branch, Compliance and Airworthiness Division,
FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 90712; attn. Galib
Abumeri; or by email to [email protected].

 (f) Special Flight Permits

    Special flight permits are prohibited.

 (g) Paperwork Reduction Act Burden Statement

    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 30 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.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Galib Abumeri, Aerospace
Engineer (Structures), Airframe Section, Los Angeles ACO Branch,
Compliance and Airworthiness Division, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd.,
Lakewood, California 90712; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].
    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(i) Additional Information

    HTC Service Notice No. 204-2100-1, dated July 5, 2017; Alert
Service Bulletin (ASB) No. UH-1H-13-09, dated January 14, 2013; Bell
ASB No. 204-75-1 and Bell ASB No. 205-75-5, both Revision C and both
dated April 25, 1979, which are not incorporated by reference,
contain additional information about the subject of this AD. For
service information identified in this AD, contact Bell Helicopter
Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, TX 76101; telephone (817)
280-3391; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may review this service information at the FAA, Office
of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy.,
Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

 (j) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6210, Main Rotor
Blades.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 9, 2018.
James A. Grigg,
Acting Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.

Appendix 1 to AD 2018-02-08

    Please report the following information by mail to the Los
Angeles ACO Branch, Compliance and Airworthiness Division, FAA, 3960
Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 90712; attn. Galib Abumeri; or
by email to [email protected].
    (1) Date of inspection:
    (2) Aircraft N-number:
    (3) M/R blade serial number:
    (4) M/R blade hours of time-in-service:
    (5) Location of each crack:
    (6) Dimension of each crack:
    (7) Primary operating location of the M/R blade:

[FR Doc. 2018-00660 Filed 1-16-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 125 (Thursday, June 28, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38492-38494]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15825]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2012-0351]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Olcott Fireworks, Lake Ontario, Olcott, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will establish a temporary safety zone on Lake
Ontario, Olcott, New York. This safety zone is intended to restrict
vessels from a portion of Lake Ontario during the Olcott fireworks on
July 3, 2012. The safety zone is necessary to protect participants,
spectators, and vessels from the hazards associated with a firework
display.

DATES: This regulation will be effective July 3, 2012 from 9:30 p.m.
until 11 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,
are part of docket [USCG-2012-0351]. To view documents mentioned in
this preamble as being available by going to http://www.regulations.gov, type the docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and
click ``SEARCH.'' You may visit the Docket Management Facility,
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or email LT Christopher Mercurio, Chief of
Waterway Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Buffalo; telephone 716-
843-9343, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee
V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Regulatory History and Information

    On May 23, 2012, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Safety Zone; Olcott Fireworks, Lake Ontario, Olcott, NY
in the Federal Register (77 FR 30451). We received no letters
commenting on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and
none was held.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard is issuing this temporary
final rule less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), an agency may issue a rule less than 30 days
before its effective date when the agency for good cause finds that
those procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest.'' Accordingly, the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for publishing this temporary final rule less than 30 days
before its effective date because delaying the effective date of this
temporary final rule would prevent its enforcement on the scheduled
night of the event and thus, would preclude the Coast Guard from
protecting spectators and vessels from the hazards associated with a
maritime fireworks display.

B. Basis and Purpose

    Between 10 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. on July 3, 2012, a fireworks display
will be held on the waters of Lake Ontario near Olcott, NY. The Captain
of the Port Buffalo has determined that fireworks launched proximate to
watercraft pose a significant risk to public safety and property. Such
hazards include premature detonations, dangerous detonations, dangerous
projectiles, and falling or burning debris.

C. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

    As mentioned above, no comments were received from the public in
response to the NPRM that preceded this temporary rule. Furthermore,
there were no changes made between the proposed rule and this temporary
final rule. Thus, there are no comments and no changes to discuss.
    Just as was described in the NPRM, the Captain of the Port Buffalo
has determined that a temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the
safety of the boating public during the Olcott Fireworks. The safety
zone will be effective and enforced from 9:30 p.m. until 11 p.m. on
July 3, 2012. The safety zone will encompass all waters of Lake
Ontario, Olcott, NY within a 1,120 FT radius of position
43[deg]20'23.57'' N, 78[deg]43'09.50'' W (DATUM: NAD 83). Entry into,
transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-
scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his designated on-
scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. It is not
``significant'' under the regulatory policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We conclude that this rule is
not a significant regulatory action because we anticipate that it will
have minimal impact on the economy, will not interfere with other
agencies, will not adversely alter the budget of any grant or loan
recipients, and will not raise any novel legal or policy issues. The
safety zone created by this rule will be relatively small and enforced
for relatively short time. Also, the safety zone is designed to
minimize its impact on navigable waters. Furthermore, the safety zone
has been designed to allow vessels to transit around it. Thus,
restrictions on vessel movement within that particular area are
expected to be minimal. Under certain conditions, moreover, vessels may
still transit through the safety zone when permitted by the Captain of
the Port.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The Coast Guard
received 0 comments from the Small Business Administration on this
rule. 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.
    This temporary final rule may affect the following entities, some
of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in a portion of Lake Ontario near
Olcott, NY between 9:30 p.m. to 11 p.m. on July 3, 2012.
    This safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This
safety zone would be activated, and thus subject to enforcement, for
only 90 minutes late in the day when vessel traffic is low. Vessel
traffic could pass safely around the safety zone. Before the effective
period, maritime advisories will be issued, which include a Broadcast
Notice to Mariners.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    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 above.
    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.

4. 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).

5. Federalism

    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 determined
that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. 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.

7. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

8. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

9. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

10. Indian Tribal Governments

    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.

11. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

12. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

13. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (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 the establishment of a safety zone and
thus, is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph
34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental
analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical
Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to
the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

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:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapters 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T09-0351 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0351  Safety Zone; Olcott Fireworks, Lake Ontario,
Olcott, NY.

    (a) Location. The safety zone will encompass all waters of Lake
Ontario, Olcott, NY within an 1,120 FT radius of position
43[deg]20'23.57'' N and 78[deg]43'09.50'' W (NAD 83).
    (b) Effective and enforcement period. This regulation is effective
and will be enforced on July 3, 2012 from 9:30 p.m. until 11 p.m.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within
this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Buffalo or his designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his designated on-
scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port
Buffalo is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who
has been designated by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act on his
behalf.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port
Buffalo or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel
16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety
zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of
the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene representative.

    Dated: June 13, 2012.
S.M. Wischmann,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo/
[FR Doc. 2012-15825 Filed 6-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P