[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 174 (Monday, September 9, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47123-47125]
[FR Doc No: 2019-19548]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2019-0774]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone, R/V POLARCUS ALIMA, Cook Inlet, Homer, Alaska

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
navigable waters within a 100-yard radius surrounding the research
vessel POLARCUS ALIMA. The safety zone is needed to protect the vessel
and members of the public anticipated to exercise their First Amendment
right to protest the vessel's activity. Entry of vessels or persons
into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the
Captain of the Port Western Alaska.

DATES: This rule is effective from September 9, 2019 through September
11, 2019.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2019-0774 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this rule,
call or email Commander Justin Jacobs, Chief of Prevention, Sector
Anchorage, U.S. Coast Guard: telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port Western Alaska
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On September 3, 2019, Hillcorp Alaska, LLC, notified the Coast
Guard Sector Anchorage that it would be conducting seismic testing in
Cook Inlet, near Kachemak Bay, via the research vessel POLARCUS ALIMNA
from September 9-11, 2019. Hillcorp also informed the Coast Guard that
it anticipates public protest activity around the vessel.
    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a), of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision
authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule. Notice and comment procedures are
impractical in this situation because there is not enough time for
those procedures before the planned vessel movement, and because
immediate action is needed to respond to the potential safety hazards
associated with the arrival and departure of the research vessel
POLARCUS ALIMA. It is impracticable to publish an NPRM because we must
establish this safety zone by September 9, 2019, and the Coast Guard
was informed of the vessel movement on September 3, 2019. For the same
reasons, the Coast Guard is making this rule effective less than thirty
days after publication. Normally, the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(d)) requires an agency to publish a rule at least
thirty days before the effective date of the rule. However, the agency
is not required to delay the effective date if the agency finds good
cause for doing so (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)). For this rule, the Coast Guard
finds good cause to not delaying the effective date of this rule.
Delaying the effective date of this rule is impracticable because the
rule must be in place in time for the planned vessel movement on
September 9, 2019, and the Coast Guard was informed about the vessel
movement on September 3, 2019.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port Western
Alaska (COTP) has determined that potential safety hazards associated
with the activity of the research vessel POLARCUS ALIMA in Cook Inlet,
near Kachemak Bay, starting September 9, 2019, through September 11,
2019, will be a safety concern for anyone within a 100-yard radius of
the vessel while at the pier and underway. This rule is needed to
protect the vessel, public, and the marine environment within the
safety zone while the vessel transits the area.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    The COTP establishes a safety zone from September 9, 2019 through
September 11, 2019. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters
within 100 yards of the research vessel POLARCUS ALIMA while in the
COTP zone. The duration of the zone is intended to protect the vessel,
public, and the marine environment within the safety zone while the
vessel is transiting the area. No vessel or person will be permitted to
enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a
designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss the First Amendment right of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and timing of the safety zone. Vessel traffic would
be able to safely transit around the safety zone, which would impact a
small roving area in Cook Inlet for 3 days. Moreover, the Coast Guard
will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16
about the safety zone and location of the research vessel POLARCUS
ALIMA, and the rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter or
transit through the safety zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    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. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the
Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves a safety zone lasting only 3 days that
would prohibit entry within 100 yards of the vessel while it is in the
COTP zone. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L60(a) in Table 3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard Environmental
Planning Implementing Procedures.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5;

Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T17-0774 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T17-0774  Safety Zone, R/V POLARCUS ALIMA, Cook Inlet, Homer,
AK.

    (a) Regulated area. The following area is specified as a safety
zone: All navigable waters within 100 yards of the research vessel
POLARCUS ALIMA while in the Captain of the Port Zone for Western Alaska
from September 9, 2019, through September 11, 2019.
    (b) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in this
part, the safety zone shall be closed to all persons and vessels unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port.
    (c) Authorization. All persons or vessels who desire to enter the
designated safety zone created in this section while it is enforced
must obtain permission from the on-scene patrol craft on VHF Ch 9.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from
September 9, 2019, through September 11, 2019.

    Dated: September 5, 2019.
Sean C. MacKenzie,
Captain of the Port Western Alaska, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2019-19548 Filed 9-6-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 221 (Monday, November 17, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68424-68426]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27056]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC15-1-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-598, FERC-
716); Consolidated Comment Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of information collections and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 USC 3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is soliciting public comment on the
requirements and burden \1\ of the information collections described
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Commission defines burden as the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain,
retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
agency. For further explanation of what is included in the
information collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal
Regulations 1320.3.

DATES: Comments on the collections of information are due January 16,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by Docket No. IC15-1-
000) by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Please reference the specific collection number and/or title in
your comments.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at (202)
273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the information collection
requirements for all collections described below with no changes to the
current reporting requirements. Please note that each collection is
distinct from the next.
    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collections of
information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the Commission, including whether the information will have
practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the
burden and cost of the collections of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance
the quality, utility and clarity of the information collections; and
(4) ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.

FERC-598, Self-Certification for Entities Seeking Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status or Foreign Utility Company Status

    OMB Control No.: 1902-0166.
    Abstract: The Commission uses the data in the FERC-598 information
collection to implement the statutory provisions of Title XII,
subchapter F of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Energy Policy Act of 2005, Public Law 109-58, 119 Stat. 594
(2005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPAct 2005 repealed the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935
(PUHCA 1935) in its entirety, and adopted in its place the Public
Utility Holding Company Act of 2005 (PUHCA 2005). This change enabled
the Commission to exempt from the requirements of PUHCA 2005 the
holding companies that hold responsibility over wholesale generators
from PUHCA 2005 on a case-by-case basis. The Commission amended its
regulations (in Order No. 667 \3\) to add procedures for self-
certification by entities seeking exempt wholesale generator (EWG) and
Foreign Utility Company (FUCO) status. This self-certification is
similar to the process available to entities that seek qualifying
facility status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Repeal of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 and
Enactment of the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005, 70 FR
75592 (2005), order on rehearing, Order 667-A, 71 FR 28446 (2006),
order on rehearing, Order 667-B, 71 FR 42750 (2006), order on
rehearing, Order 667-C, 118 FERC 61133 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An EWG is a ``person engaged directly, or indirectly through one or
more affiliates . . . and exclusively in the business of owning or
operating, or both owning and operating, all or part of one or more
eligible facilities and selling electric energy at wholesale.'' \4\ A
FUCO is a company that ``owns or operates facilities that are not
located in any state and that are used for the generation,
transmission, or distribution of electric energy for sale or the
distribution at retail of natural or manufactured gas for heat, light,
or power, if such company: (1) Derives no part of its income, directly
or indirectly, from the generation, transmission, or distribution of
electric energy for sale or the distribution at retail of natural or
manufactured gas for heat, light, or power, within the United States;
and (2) neither the company nor any of its subsidiary companies is a
public-utility company operating in the United States.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 18 CFR 366.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An EWG, FUCO, or its representative seeking to self-certify its
status must file with the Commission a notice of self-certification
demonstrating that it satisfies the definition of EWG or FUCO. In the
case of EWGs, the person filing a notice of self-certification must
also file a copy of the notice of self-certification with the state
regulatory authority of the state in which the facility is located and
that person must also represent to the Commission in its submission
that it has filed a copy of the notice with the appropriate state
regulatory authority.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 18 CFR 366.7.

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

    Submission of the information collected by FERC-598 is necessary
for the Commission to carry out its responsibilities under EPAct
2005.\6\ The Commission implements its responsibilities through the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 18 Part 366. These filing
requirements are mandatory for entities seeking to self-certify their
EWG or FUCO status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 42 U.S.C. 16451 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Respondent: EWGs and FUCOs.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: The Commission estimates the annual
public reporting burden for the information collection as:

                 FERC-598 (Self-Certification for Entities Seeking Exempt Wholesale Generator Status or Foreign Utility Company Status)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Average      Total annual
                                                          Number of      Annual  number  Total number of   burden & cost  burden hours &     Cost per
                                                         respondents     of  responses      responses      per response    total annual     respondent
                                                                        per  respondent                         \7\            cost             ($)
                                                                  (1)              (2)   (1) * (2) = (3)             (4)     (3) * (4) =       (5) / (1)
                                                                                (5)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EWGs/FUCOs...........................................             102                1              102                6             612            $423
                                                                                $423         $43,146
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FERC-716, Good Faith Requests for Transmission Service and Good Faith
Responses by Transmitting Utilities Under Sections 211(a) and 213(a) of
the Federal Power Act (FPA) \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The estimates for cost per response are derived using the
following formula: Average Burden Hours per Response * $70.50 per
Hour = Average Cost per Response. The cost per hour figure is the
FERC average salary plus benefits. Subject matter experts found that
industry employment costs closely resemble FERC's regarding the
FERC-598 information collection.
    \8\ Previously titled ``Transmission Services (Good Faith
Request, Response by Transmitting Utility, and Application) under
Sections 211 and 213a of the Federal Power Act''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OMB Control No.: 1902-0170.
    Abstract: The Commission uses the information collected under the
requirements of FERC-716 to implement the statutory provisions of
Sections 211 and Section 213 of the Federal Power Act as amended and
added by the Energy Policy Act 1992. FERC-716 also includes the
requirement to file a Section 211 request if the negotiations between
the transmission requestor and the transmitting utility are
unsuccessful. For the initial process, the information is not filed
with the Commission. However, the request and response may be analyzed
as a part of a Section 211 action. The Commission may order
transmission services under the authority of FPA 211.
    The Commission's regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), 18 CFR 2.20, provide standards by which the Commission
determines if and when a valid good faith request for transmission has
been made under section 211 of the FPA. By developing the standards,
the Commission sought to encourage an open exchange of data with a
reasonable degree of specificity and completeness between the party
requesting transmission services and the transmitting utility. As a
result, 18 CFR 2.20 identifies 12 components of a good faith estimate
and 5 components of a reply to a good faith request.
    Type of Respondent: Transmission Requestors and Transmitting
Utilities
    Estimate of Annual Burden: The Commission estimates the annual
public reporting burden for the information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The estimates for cost per response are derived using the
following formula: Average Burden Hours per Response * $70.50 per
Hour = Average Cost per Response. The cost per hour figure is the
FERC average salary plus benefits. Subject matter experts found that
industry employment costs closely resemble FERC's regarding the
FERC-716 information collection.

    FERC-716 (Good Faith Requests for Transmission Service and Good Faith Responses by Transmitting Utilities Under Sections 211(a) and 213(a) of the
                                                                Federal Power Act (FPA))
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Average      Total annual
                                                          Number of      Annual  number  Total number of   burden & cost  burden hours &     Cost per
                                                         respondents     of  responses      responses      per response    total annual     respondent
                                                                        per  respondent                         \9\            cost             ($)
                                                                  (1)              (2)   (1) * (2) = (3)             (4)     (3) * (4) =       (5) / (1)
                                                                                (5)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information exchange between parties.................               3                1                3              100             300           $7050
                                                                                $7050         $21,150
Application submitted to FERC if parties'                           3                1                3              2.5             7.5         $176.25
 negotiations are unsuccessful.......................                                                            $176.25         $528.75
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total............................................  ...............  ...............               6   ..............           307.5       $7,226.25
                                                                                $21,678.75
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: November 7, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-27056 Filed 11-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 14, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51042-51044]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19614]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0779; Project Identifier MCAI-2020-01505-R]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH
Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH Model MBB-BK 117 D-2
helicopters. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of chafing marks
on a wiring harness near the locking washer of the lateral control rod.
This proposed AD would require an inspection of the wiring harness and
the routing of the wiring harness and corrective actions if necessary,
as specified in a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD,
which is proposed for incorporation by reference (IBR). The FAA is
proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 29,
2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For EASA material that is proposed for IBR in this AD, contact
EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; phone: +49 221
8999 000; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: www.easa.europa.eu. You
may find the EASA material on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321,
Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. This material is also
available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2021-0779.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0779; 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 EASA AD,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
Docket Operations is listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacob Fitch, Aerospace Engineer, COS
Program Management Section, Operational Safety Branch, Compliance &
Airworthiness Division, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX
76177; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2021-0779; Project Identifier
MCAI-2020-01505-R'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposal because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. The agency will also post a report summarizing each
substantive verbal contact received about this NPRM.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this NPRM contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this NPRM, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this NPRM. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Jacob
Fitch, Aerospace Engineer, COS Program Management Section, Operational
Safety Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA, 10101 Hillwood
Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Any commentary that the FAA receives that is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

Background

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2020-0246, dated November 10, 2020
(EASA AD 2020-0246), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Airbus
Helicopters Deutschland GmbH, formerly Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH
Model MBB-BK 117 D-2 helicopters.
    This proposed AD was prompted by a report of chafing marks on a
wiring harness near the locking washer of the lateral control rod. The
FAA is proposing this AD to address chafing marks on a wiring harness
near the locking washer of the lateral control rod, which if not
addressed, could result in in-flight loss of the hoist load and
possible personal injury, or could generate a burning smell and
possible need for the flight crew to implement the applicable emergency
procedure. See EASA AD 2020-0246 for additional background information.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2020-0246 requires an inspection of the wiring harness and
the routing of the wiring harness for discrepancies (includes damaged
wire harnesses and insufficient clearances) and corrective actions
(includes repair of wire harnesses and re-routing the wire harness) if
necessary, and an update of the Aircraft Maintenance Programme (AMP) to
incorporate certain tasks. This material is reasonably available
because the interested parties have access to it through their normal
course of business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by EASA and are approved for
operation

in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with
the European Union, EASA has notified the FAA about the unsafe
condition described in its AD. The FAA is proposing this AD after
evaluating all known relevant information and determining that the
unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop on
other helicopters of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements in This NPRM

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in EASA AD 2020-0246, described previously, as incorporated by
reference, except for any differences identified as exceptions in the
regulatory text of this proposed AD and except as discussed under
``Differences Between this Proposed AD and the EASA AD.''

Explanation of Required Compliance Information

    In the FAA's ongoing efforts to improve the efficiency of the AD
process, the FAA developed a process to use some civil aviation
authority (CAA) ADs as the primary source of information for compliance
with requirements for corresponding FAA ADs. The FAA has been
coordinating this process with manufacturers and CAAs. As a result, the
FAA proposes to incorporate EASA AD 2020-0246 by reference in the FAA
final rule. This proposed AD would, therefore, require compliance with
EASA AD 2020-0246 in its entirety through that incorporation, except
for any differences identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of
this proposed AD. Using common terms that are the same as the heading
of a particular section in EASA AD 2020-0246 does not mean that
operators need comply only with that section. For example, where the AD
requirement refers to ``all required actions and compliance times,''
compliance with this AD requirement is not limited to the section
titled ``Required Action(s) and Compliance Time(s)'' in EASA AD 2020-
0246. Service information required by EASA AD 2020-0246 for compliance
will be available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0779 after the FAA final rule is
published.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the EASA AD

    EASA AD 2020-0246 requires revising the ``Aircraft Maintenance
Programme (AMP),'' whereas this proposed AD would not because not all
U.S. operators are required to have a maintenance program.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD, if adopted as proposed, would
affect 31 helicopters of U.S. Registry. Labor rates are estimated at
$85 per work-hour. Based on these numbers, the FAA estimates the
following costs to comply with this proposed AD.

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on  U.S.
               Action                         Labor cost            Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.........................  1 work-hour x $85 per hour               $0             $85          $2,635
                                      = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary repairs
and re-routing that would be required based on the results of the
proposed inspection. The agency has no way of determining the number of
aircraft that might need these repairs:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repairs and re-routing.....................  Up to 1 work-hour x $85 per hour =             $0 *             $85
                                              $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The FAA has received no definitive data on which to base the cost estimates for the on-condition repairs
  specified in this proposed AD.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.
Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight
of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for
practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary
for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to
exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Would not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Would not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH: Docket No. FAA-2021-0779;
Project Identifier MCAI-2020-01505-R.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this airworthiness directive
(AD) by October 29, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH Model
MBB-BK 117 D-2 helicopters, certificated in any category, as
identified in European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2020-
0246, dated November 10, 2020 (EASA AD 2020-0246).

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 2597, Equip/
Furnishing System Wiring.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of chafing marks on a wiring
harness near the locking washer of the lateral control rod. The FAA
is issuing this AD to address chafing marks on a wiring harness near
the locking washer of the lateral control rod. The unsafe condition,
if not addressed, could result in in-flight loss of the hoist load
and possible personal injury, or could generate a burning smell and
possible need for the flight crew to implement the applicable
emergency procedure.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, EASA AD 2020-0246.

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2020-0246

    (1) Where EASA AD 2020-0246 requires compliance in terms of
flight hours, this AD requires using hours time-in-service.
    (2) Where EASA AD 2020-0246 refers to its effective date, this
AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (3) Where Paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2020-0246 specifies to update
the Aircraft Maintenance Programme (AMP) with certain tasks included
in the service information referenced by EASA AD 2020-0246, this AD
does not include that requirement.
    (4) This AD does not require the ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD
2020-0246.

(i) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with 14 CFR
21.197 and 21.199 to operate the helicopter to a location where the
actions of this AD can be performed, provided that no debris from
chafing is visible that would allow jamming or fouling of the flight
controls, the chafing does not interfere with the flight controls by
jamming or fouling, and the systems impacted by the wiring harness
are rendered inoperable by collaring the circuit breaker.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

(k) Related Information

    (1) For EASA AD 2020-0246, contact EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3,
50668 Cologne, Germany; phone: +49 221 8999 000; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet: www.easa.europa.eu. You may view this
material at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest
Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
(817) 222-5110. This material may be found in the AD docket at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2021-0779.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Jacob Fitch,
Aerospace Engineer, COS Program Management Section, Operational
Safety Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA, 10101
Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued on September 2, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-19614 Filed 9-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 24, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33661-33662]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11067]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0125; FMCSA-2014-0102; FMCSA-2014-0106; FMCSA-
2014-0107; FMCSA-2014-0383; FMCSA-2014-0384; FMCSA-2015-0326; FMCSA-
2018-0138]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Hearing

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

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 13
individuals from the hearing requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle
(CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these hard of hearing and deaf
individuals to continue to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions are applicable on June 17, 2023. The exemptions
expire on June 17, 2025. Comments must be received on or before June
23, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the Federal Docket
Management System Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0125, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-
0102, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0106, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0107, Docket
No.FMCSA-2014-0383, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0384, Docket No. FMCSA-2015-
0326, or Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0138 using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov/,
insert the docket number (FMCSA-2013-0125, FMCSA-2014-0102, FMCSA-2014-
0106, FMCSA-2014-0107, FMCSA-2014-0383, FMCSA-2014-0384, FMCSA-2015-
0326, or FMCSA-2018-0138) in the keyword box and click ``Search.''
Next, sort the results by ``Posted (Newer-Older),'' choose the first
notice listed, and click on the ``Comment'' button. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Dockets Operations; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division, FMCSA, DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W64-224, Washington, DC 20590-0001,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected]. Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions
regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Dockets
Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0125, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0102, Docket
No. FMCSA-2014-0106, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0107, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-
0383, Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0384, Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0326, or Docket
No. FMCSA-2018-0138), indicate the specific section of this document to
which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online or by
fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means.
FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an
email address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that
FMCSA can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to www.regulations.gov/, insert
the docket number (FMCSA-2013-0125, FMCSA-2014-0102, FMCSA-2014-0106,
FMCSA-2014-0107, FMCSA-2014-0383, FMCSA-2014-0384, FMCSA-2015-0326, or
FMCSA-2018-0138) in the keyword box and click ``Search.'' Next, sort
the results by ``Posted (Newer-Older),'' choose the first notice
listed, click the ``Comment'' button, and type your comment into the
text box on the following screen. Choose whether you are submitting
your comment as an individual or on behalf of a third party and then
submit.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. FMCSA will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period.

B. Viewing Comments

    To view comments go to www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket
number (FMCSA-2013-0125, FMCSA-2014-0102, FMCSA-2014-0106, FMCSA-2014-
0107, FMCSA-2014-0383, FMCSA-2014-0384, FMCSA-2015-0326, or FMCSA-2018-
0138) in the keyword box and click ``Search.'' Next, sort the results
by ``Posted (Newer-Older),'' choose the first notice listed, and click
``Browse Comments.'' If you do not have access to the internet, you may
view the docket online by visiting Dockets Operations on the ground
floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you,
please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting Dockets
Operations.

C. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(6), DOT solicits comments
from the public on the exemption requests. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov. As described in the system of records
notice DOT/ALL 14 (Federal Docket Management System), which can be
reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/privacy/privacy-act-system-records-notices, the comments are searchable by the name of
the submitter.

II. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the FMCSRs for no longer than a 5-year period if it finds such
exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to,
or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such
exemption. The statutes also allow the Agency to renew exemptions at
the end of the 5-year period. FMCSA grants medical exemptions from the
FMCSRs for a 2-year period to align with the maximum duration of a
driver's medical certification.
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding hearing
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person first perceives a forced
whispered voice in the better ear at not less than 5 feet with or
without the use of a hearing aid or, if tested by use of an audiometric
device, does not have an average hearing loss in the

better ear greater than 40 decibels at 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz
with or without a hearing aid when the audiometric device is calibrated
to American National Standard (formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5--1951.
    This standard was adopted in 1970 and was revised in 1971 to allow
drivers to be qualified under this standard while wearing a hearing
aid, (35 FR 6458, 6463 (Apr. 22, 1970) and 36 FR 12857 (July 8, 1971),
respectively).
    The 13 individuals listed in this notice have requested renewal of
their exemptions from the hearing standard in Sec.  391.41(b)(11), in
accordance with FMCSA procedures. Accordingly, FMCSA has evaluated
these applications for renewal on their merits and decided to extend
each exemption for a renewable 2-year period.

III. Request for Comments

    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level ofsafety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

IV. Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), each of the 13
applicants has satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an
exemption from the hearing requirement. The 13 drivers in this notice
remain in good standing with the Agency. In addition, for commercial
driver's license (CDL) holders, the Commercial Driver's License
Information System and the Motor Carrier Management Information System
are searched for crash and violation data. For non-CDL holders, the
Agency reviews the driving records from the State Driver's Licensing
Agency. These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each
driver's ability to continue to safely operate a CMV in interstate
commerce. Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for
each of these drivers for a period of 2 years is likely to achieve a
level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.
    As of June 17, 2023, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b), the following 13 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the hearing requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers:

 Kevin Ballard (TX)
 Herbert Crowe (MO)
 Mark Dickson (TX)
 Jacob Gadreault (MA)
David Garland (ME)
Lane Grover (IN)
 Paul Langlois (OH)
Billie Jo Martinez (TX)
David Shores (NC)
Kirk Soneson (OH)
James Thomason (MO)
Ramarr Wadley (PA)
 Jeffrey Webber (OK)

    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2013-0125, FMCSA-
2014-0102, FMCSA-2014-0106, FMCSA-2014-0107, FMCSA-2014-0383, FMCSA-
2014-0384, FMCSA-2015-0326, or FMCSA-2018-0138. Their exemptions are
applicable as of June 17, 2023 and will expire on June 17, 2025.

V. Conditions and Requirements

    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) each driver must report any crashes or accidents as defined in
Sec.  390.5T; and (2) report all citations and convictions for
disqualifying offenses under 49 CFR parts 383 and 391 to FMCSA; and (3)
each driver prohibited from operating a motorcoach or bus with
passengers in interstate commerce. The driver must also have a copy of
the exemption when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized
Federal, State, or local enforcement official. In addition, the
exemption does not exempt the individual from meeting the applicable
CDL testing requirements. Each exemption will be valid for 2 years
unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be rescinded if:
(1) the person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the
exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety
than was maintained before it was granted; or (3) continuation of the
exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b).

VI. Preemption

    During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall
enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with
respect to a person operating under the exemption.

VII. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 13 exemption applications, FMCSA
renews the exemptions of the aforementioned drivers from the hearing
requirement in Sec.  391.41 (b)(11). In accordance with 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315(b), each exemption will be valid for 2 years unless
revoked earlier by FMCSA.

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-11067 Filed 5-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 22, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10423-10424]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3918]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0958; FRL- 9634-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
West Virginia; Amendments to West Virginia's Ambient Air Quality
Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of West Virginia (West Virginia). This
revision pertains to amendments of West Virginia's Legislative Rule
regarding ambient air quality standards (45CSR8- Ambient Air Quality
Standards). These amendments incorporate by reference the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for sulfur dioxide, particulate
matter, carbon monoxide, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and lead. This action
is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 23, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2011-0958 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0958, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2011-0958. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy 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 West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE., Charleston,
West Virginia 25304.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Asrah Khadr,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

I. Background

    On July 8, 2011, the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection submitted a SIP revision pertaining to amendments of
Legislative Rule 45CSR8--Ambient Air Quality Standards. EPA had
approved a previous revision of Legislative Rule 45CSR8 on February 10,
2009 (74 FR 6552).

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    Amendments to 45CSR8 consist of revisions to section 45-8-1--
General, subpart 1.6--Former Rules, in which the effective and filed
dates were revised to represent the most recent changes to the NAAQS
and the addition of subpart 1.5--Incorporation by Reference to section
45-8-1 to incorporate by reference 40 CFR part 50--National Primary and
Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards and 40 CFR part 53--Ambient Air
Monitoring Reference and Equivalent Methods, effective June 1, 2010.
The previous version of 45CSR8 merely stated EPA standards for the
NAAQS and the revised version incorporates by reference the NAAQS and
monitoring reference and equivalency methods. Also, other amendments to
45CSR8 include the addition of section 45-8-3--Adoption of Standards
and the removal of section 45-8-2--Anti-Degradation Policy, section 45-
8-4--Ambient Air Quality Standards, section 45-8-5--Methods of
Measurement, and section 45-8-6--Reference Conditions.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the West Virginia SIP revision
regarding the incorporation by reference of the NAAQS for sulfur
dioxide, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, ozone, nitrogen dioxide,
and lead into 45CSR8--Ambient Air Quality Standards, which was
submitted on July 12, 2011. EPA is soliciting public comments on the
issues discussed in this document. These comments will be considered
before taking final action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the proposed approval of the West Virginia SIP
revision regarding the incorporation by reference of the NAAQS for
sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, ozone, nitrogen
dioxide, and lead into 45CSR8-Ambient Air Quality Standards, does not
have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in
Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

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

    Dated: February 6, 2012.
W. C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2012-3918 Filed 2-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P