[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 46 (Thursday, March 8, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9820-9822]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04650]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2018-0180; Product Identifier 2017-CE-043-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Quest Aircraft Design, LLC Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Quest Aircraft Design, LLC Model KODIAK 100 airplanes. This proposed AD
was prompted by reports of cracks found in certain nose landing gear
forks. This proposed AD would require a one-time inspection to
determine if the affected nose landing gear fork is installed,
repetitive inspections of the affected nose landing gear fork for
cracks, repetitive inspections of the shimmy damper bracket for
looseness if the affected nose landing gear fork is installed, and
rework/replacement of parts as necessary. We are proposing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 23, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Quest
Aircraft Company LLC, 1200 Turbine Drive, Sandpoint, Idaho 83864;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or 1<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected]; internet: http://customercare.questaircraft.com/. You may view this service information
at the FAA, Policy and Innovation Division, 901 Locust, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2018-
0180; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations (phone: 800-647-
5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wade Sullivan, Aerospace Engineer,
Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW, Renton, WA 98057; phone:
425-917-6430; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2018-0180;
Product Identifier 2017-CE-043-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this NPRM because
of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this NPRM.

Discussion

    We received reports from the manufacturer of fatigue cracks on the
nose landing gear (NLG) fork on Quest Aircraft Design, LLC Model KODIAK
100 airplanes. In one report, the NLG fork failed during landing. On
unimproved surfaces, the NLG shimmy damper system can wear and loosen,
reducing the resistance of the nose gear to shimmy. Shimmying puts side
loads on the NLG fork that it was not designed for, which could cause
fatigue cracks. This condition, if not corrected, could result in
separation of the fork with consequent reduced control on landing. If
the fork separates on an unimproved surface, the risk of the NLG
digging in and the airplane overturning on the ground increases.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Quest Aircraft Field Service Instruction FSI-147,
Revision 00 (not dated), which provides instructions for inspection
and, if necessary, replacement of the NLG fork. We reviewed pages
32_110 and 32_111, section 3252, Shimmy Damper, found in Chapter 32,
Landing Gear, of Quest Aircraft Company Kodiak 100 Maintenance Manual,
Revision No. 21, dated February 15, 2017, which describes procedures
for inspecting the shimmy damper system. We also reviewed Quest
Aircraft Field Service Instruction FSI-146, Revision 00 (not dated),
which provides instructions for modifying the shimmy damper attach
bracket. This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing 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 the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information described previously.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 116 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
             Action                  Labor cost              Parts cost               product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Determine if type A or type B    1 work-hour x $85  Not applicable..............             $85          $9,860
 NLG fork is installed.           per hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary additional
inspections, replacements, and modifications that would be required
based on the results of the proposed NLG fork type determination. We
have no way of determining the number of airplanes that might need
these inspections, replacements, and modifications:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
               Action                      Labor cost                    Parts cost                 product
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection of the NLG fork for       4 work-hours x $85 per  Not applicable...................            $340
 cracks.                              hour = $340.
Replacement of the NLG fork........  4 work-hours x $85 per  $7,002.36........................        7,342.36
                                      hour = $340.
Inspection of the shimmy damper      1 work-hour x $85 per   Not applicable...................              85
 bracket.                             hour = $85.
Rework of the shimmy damper bracket  4 work-hours x $85 per  $127.33..........................          467.33
                                      hour = $340.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to small airplanes, gliders,
balloons, airships, domestic business jet transport airplanes, and
associated appliances to the Director of the Policy and Innovation
Division.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Quest Aircraft Design, LLC: Docket No. FAA-2018-0180; Product
Identifier 2017-CE-043-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by April 23, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Quest Aircraft Design, LLC Model KODIAK 100
airplanes; all serial numbers, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 32, Landing Gear.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports from the manufacturer of fatigue
cracks on the nose landing gear (NLG) fork. We are issuing this AD
to detect and prevent fatigue cracking of the NLG fork. The unsafe
condition, if not corrected, could result in separation of the fork
with consequent reduced control on landing. If the fork separates on
an unimproved surface, the risk of the NLG digging in and the
airplane overturning on the ground increases.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection for Type of NLG Fork

    Within 25 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective date
of this AD, inspect the airplane to determine if a NLG fork part
number (P/N)<PHONE_NUMBER> (type A) or a NLG fork P/N<PHONE_NUMBER>
(type B) is installed. If you determine that a NLG P/N<PHONE_NUMBER>
(type B) is installed during the inspection, no further action is
required by this AD. If a review of the maintenance records can
positively identify the P/N NLG fork that is installed, you may use
a maintenance records review in lieu of

inspecting the airplane to determine if a NLG fork P/N<PHONE_NUMBER>
(type A) or a NLG fork P/N<PHONE_NUMBER> (type B) is installed.

(h) Inspection of the NLG Fork for Cracks

    (1) If you determine that a NLG fork P/N<PHONE_NUMBER> (type A)
is installed during the inspection required in paragraph (g) of this
AD, within 25 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD and
repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours TIS, do
a fluorescent penetrant, dye penetrant, or open-hole eddy current
inspection of the NLG fork for cracks following section 5.
Instructions in Quest Aircraft Field Service Instruction FSI-147,
Revision 00 (not dated).
    (2) If you find any cracks of the NLG fork during any inspection
required in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD, before further flight,
replace the NLG fork with a NLG fork P/N<PHONE_NUMBER> (type B)
following section 5. Instructions in Quest Aircraft Field Service
Instruction FSI-147, Revision 00 (not dated). Replacement of the NLG
fork with a NLG fork P/N<PHONE_NUMBER> (type B) terminates the
repetitive inspections required in paragraphs (h)(1) and (i)(1) of
this AD.

(i) Inspection of the Shimmy Damper Bracket

    (1) If you have not replaced a NLG fork P/N<PHONE_NUMBER> (type
A) per the initial inspection and replacement requirements in
paragraph (h) of this AD, then within 25 hours TIS after the
effective date of this AD and repetitively thereafter at intervals
not to exceed 100 hours TIS (until the NLG fork is replaced with a
P/N<PHONE_NUMBER> (type B fork)), inspect the shimmy damper bracket
for looseness following pages 32_110 and 32_111, section 3252,
Shimmy Damper, found in Chapter 32, Landing Gear, of Quest Aircraft
Company Kodiak 100 Maintenance Manual, Revision No. 21, dated
February 15, 2017.
    (2) If a loose shimmy damper bracket is found during any
inspection required in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, rework the
shimmy damper bracket with interference-fit bolts following Quest
Aircraft Field Service Instruction FSI-146, Revision 00 (not dated).
Reworking the shimmy damper bracket with the interference-fit bolts
terminates the repetitive inspections required in paragraph (i)(1)
of this AD.
    (3) If any other damaged (loose, leaking, corrosion, worn, etc.)
components are found in the shimmy damper system during any
inspection required in paragraph (i)(1) of this AD, before further
flight, replace damaged components as necessary following pages
32_110 and 32_111, section 3252, Shimmy Damper, found in Chapter 32,
Landing Gear, of Quest Aircraft Company Kodiak 100 Maintenance
Manual, Revision No. 21, dated February 15, 2017.

(j) Optional Terminating Action

    In lieu of the NLG fork and shimmy damper bracket inspections
required in paragraphs (h)(1) and (i)(1) of this AD, you may replace
the NLG fork P/N<PHONE_NUMBER> (type A) with a NLG fork P/N 100-410-
7013 (type B) following section 5. Instructions in Quest Aircraft
Field Service Instruction FSI-147, Revision 00 (not dated). This
replacement terminates the inspection requirements of this AD and no
further actions are required.

(k) Restriction of NLG Fork P/N<PHONE_NUMBER> (Type A) Installation

    Once a NLG fork P/N<PHONE_NUMBER> (type B) is installed on an
airplane, do not install a NLG fork P/N<PHONE_NUMBER> (type A). If a
NLG fork P/N<PHONE_NUMBER> (type B) is removed from the airplane for
any reason (for example, to install floats), you must reinstall a
NLG fork P/N<PHONE_NUMBER> (type B) when operating with wheels.

 (l) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. Information may
also be emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(m) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Wade Sullivan,
Aerospace Engineer, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW,
Renton, WA 98057; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact Quest
Aircraft Company LLC, 1200 Turbine Drive, Sandpoint, Idaho 83864;
phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or 1<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected]; internet: http://customercare.questaircraft.com/. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Policy and Innovation Division, 901 Locust,
Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March 1, 2018.
Pat Mullen,
Acting Deputy Director, Policy & Innovation Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-04650 Filed 3-7-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 198 (Tuesday, October 13, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64455-64456]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22576]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OGC-2020-0509; FRL 10015-50-OGC]

Proposed Consent Decree, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed consent decree; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (``CAA'' or the ``Act''), the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (``EPA'') gives notice of a proposed consent decree
in Our Children's Earth Foundation v. Wheeler, No. 4:20-cv-00396-JSW
(N.D. Cal.). In this litigation, Our Children's Earth Foundation
(``OCEF'') alleged that the Administrator of EPA failed to perform
certain non-discretionary duties to timely respond, in accordance with
the Act, to numerous state implementation plan (``SIP'') submittals
from the State of California. The proposed consent decree would
establish deadlines for EPA to take action in response to these
California SIP submittals. The proposed consent decree does not require
EPA to take any specific, particular action in response to the
submittals.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed consent decree must be received
by November 12, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OGC-2020-0509, online at https://www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred
method). Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
number for this action. Comments received may be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information
provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Additional Information
about Commenting on the Proposed Consent Decree'' heading under the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. Out of an abundance
of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA Docket
Center and Reading Room are closed to the public, with limited
exceptions, to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket
Center staff will continue to provide remote customer service via
email, phone, and webform. We encourage the public to submit comments
via https://www.regulations.gov, as there may be a delay in processing
mail and faxes. Hand deliveries and couriers may be received by
scheduled appointment only. For further information on EPA Docket
Center services and the current status, please visit us online at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Starrs, Air and Radiation Law
Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Obtaining a Copy of the Proposed Consent Decree

    The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2020-0509) contains a copy of the proposed consent
decree.
    The electronic version of the public docket for this action
contains a copy of the proposed consent decree, and is available
through https://www.regulations.gov. You may use https://www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index
listing of the contents of the official public docket, and access those
documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once
in the system, key in the appropriate docket identification number then
select ``search.''

II. Additional Information About the Proposed Consent Decree

    The proposed consent decree would fully resolve two lawsuits filed
by OCEF seeking to compel the Administrator to take action, in
accordance with CAA section 110, 42 U.S.C. 7410, to respond to numerous
California SIP submittals. Both lawsuits were filed in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California: the
first, OCEF v. Wheeler, No. 4:20-cv-00396-JSW, was

filed on January 20, 2020 and the second, OCEF v. Wheeler, No. 3:20-cv-
01380-WHA, was filed on February 24, 2020. Subsequently, by Order dated
June 15, 2020, both cases were consolidated in one action, OCEF v.
Wheeler, No. 4:20-cv-00396-JSW.
    In the consolidated action, OCEF alleges that the State of
California made 72 specifically-identified SIP submittals over a period
of years (the majority from 2016-2018) and that EPA has failed to meet
its non-discretionary duty to take timely action in response to each of
those submittals. In the ordinary course of its administrative action,
EPA continues to evaluate and take action on SIP submittals from all
the states, including the State of California, and does not necessarily
suspend such on-going action because of pending litigation, such as the
consolidated action that is the subject of the proposed consent decree.
In fact, during the pendency of this litigation, EPA has taken final
action on some of the California SIP submittals originally at issue in
the litigation.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See, for example, 85 FR 57714 (September 16, 2020), 85 FR
57703 (September 16, 2020). and 85 FR 57712 (September 16, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the terms of the proposed consent decree, EPA shall, in
accordance with a stated schedule, take final action in response to all
the California SIP submittals identified in the litigation that are
still at issue (i.e. that EPA has not otherwise taken action on during
the pending litigation). The schedule requires EPA to take such action
on a certain specified number of the California SIP submittals that are
at issue by each of four successive dates--December 22, 2020, September
30, 2021, September 30, 2022, and June 30, 2023--such that by the last
such date EPA will have taken action on all the submittals. In some
instances, the schedule specifically identifies particular SIP
submittals in response to which EPA must take action by a specified
date, but otherwise, the schedule states that EPA must take action on a
minimum number of submittals by each date. It is possible, while this
litigation is pending and before the proposed consent decree is final,
as EPA continues in the ordinary course of its administrative
activities, that EPA may take action on more of the California SIP
submittals presently at issue (and which the proposed consent decree
currently addresses). In that event, the parties subsequently may
slightly adjust the proposed consent decree to ensure that the consent
decree is limited to the remaining outstanding SIP submittals. The
structure and essence of the proposed consent decree would be
unchanged, though, and EPA will be required to take action on all of
the remaining SIP submittals at issue in accordance with the prescribed
schedule.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EPA would not regard any such future adjustments (if any) to
the proposed consent decree as material and does not intend, in such
event, to give further notice of the proposed consent decree.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to setting out a schedule for EPA to take action on the
California SIP submittals at issue, the proposed consent decree
provides that if California withdraws any of the submittals, EPA no
longer has an obligation (under the proposed consent decree) to take
action in response to such withdrawn submittal(s). The proposed consent
decree also requires that, as EPA takes action in response to the
California SIP submittals at issue, EPA shall send the actions to the
Office of the Federal Register for publication in the Federal Register.
See the proposed consent decree in the docket for other terms and
conditions.
    For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication
of this document, the Agency will accept written comments relating to
the proposed consent decree. EPA or the Department of Justice may
withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree if the
comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that such
consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent with
the requirements of the Act.

III. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Consent
Decree

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2020-
0509, via https://www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from this docket. The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit to EPA's docket at https://www.regulations.gov any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. For additional information about submitting information
identified as CBI, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. Note that written
comments containing CBI and submitted by mail may be delayed and
deliveries or couriers will be received by scheduled appointment only.
    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other
contact information in the body of your comment. This ensures that you
can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to
contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your
comment. Any identifying or contact information provided in the body of
a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the
official public docket and made available in EPA's electronic public
docket. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment.
    Use of the https://www.regulations.gov website to submit comments
to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments.
The electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
    Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.

Gautam Srinivasan,
Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2020-22576 Filed 10-9-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 31 (Thursday, February 18, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 10119]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03324]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4525-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Utah; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Utah (FEMA-4525-DR), dated April 4, 2020, and related
determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on January 20, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Nancy J.
Dragani, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating
Officer for this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Lee K. dePalo as Federal
Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Robert J. Fenton,
Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-03324 Filed 2-17-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P