[Federal Register: May 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 94)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 27414-27416]
[DOCID:fr17my10-7]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0129; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-245-AD;
Amendment 39-16287; AD 2010-10-08]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus A318, A319, A320, A321 Series
Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

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

    Several occurrences of loss of the AC [alternating current] BUS
1 have been reported which led in some instances to the loss of the
AC ESS [essential] BUS and DC [direct current] ESS BUS and connected
systems. The affected systems include multiple flight deck Display
Units (Primary Flight Display, Navigation Display and Upper
Electronic Centralised Aircraft Monitoring display).
* * * * *
    The loss of multiple display units, if not corrected expediently
during a high workload period, potentially affects the capability of
the flight crew and could contribute to a loss of situational
awareness and consequent control of the aeroplane, which would
constitute an unsafe condition.
* * * * *
We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective June 21, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of June 21,
2010.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Dulin, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2141; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on February 23, 2010
(75 FR 8003). That NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    Several occurrences of loss of the AC [alternating current] BUS
1 have been reported which led in some instances to the loss of the
AC ESS [essential] BUS and DC [direct current] ESS BUS and connected
systems. The affected systems include multiple flight deck Display
Units (Primary Flight Display, Navigation Display and Upper
Electronic Centralised Aircraft Monitoring display).
    The reasons for these events have been investigated but have not
been fully established for all cases.
    Due to the range of system losses some crews reported difficulty
in establishing the failure cause during the events and,
consequently, the appropriate actions to be taken may not be
completed in a timely manner.
    The loss of multiple display units, if not corrected expediently
during a high workload period, potentially affects the capability of
the flight crew and could contribute to a loss of situational
awareness and consequent control of the aeroplane, which would
constitute an unsafe condition.
    This AD therefore mandates the modification of the electrical
network configuration management logic consisting in adding an
automatic switching of the AC and DC ESS BUS power supply such that
upon the loss of the AC BUS 1, the AC BUS 2 will automatically take
over the power supply. On pre-MOD aeroplanes, this power supply
switching can only be accomplished manually from the cockpit and is
covered by an Electronic Centralized Aircraft Monitoring (ECAM)
procedure.

The modification of the electrical power distribution system includes,
depending on the configuration, adding a new circuit breaker and new
relay to the AC/DC ESS BUS circuit, and adding a diode between a
certain relay and terminal block. You may obtain further information by
examining the MCAI in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We considered the comment received.

Support and Request to Reduce Compliance Time

    The Airline Pilots Association, International (ALPA) supports this
AD, and asks that the 48-month compliance time proposed in the NPRM be
reduced to 24 months. ALPA states that, given the potentially serious
consequences of the flightcrew experiencing a very high workload during
a critical phase of flight, the compliance time should be reduced based
on the number of events and the safety risk associated with BUS
failures.
    We do not agree that the compliance time should be reduced. In
developing the compliance time for this AD action, we considered not
only the safety implications of the identified unsafe condition, but
the average utilization rate of the affected fleet, the practical
aspects of modifying the fleet during the compliance time, and the
availability of required parts. In addition, we have coordinated with
the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community. We have
determined that the 48-month compliance time to do the modification
addresses the identified unsafe condition and ensures an adequate level
of safety for the affected fleet. We have made no change to the AD in
this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the
AD as proposed.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 633 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 46 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $2,200 per
product. Where the service information lists required parts costs that
are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no
charge for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for
affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated
here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the
U.S. operators to be $3,867,630, or $6,110 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this AD will not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this AD:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

Examining the AD Docket

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2010-10-08 Airbus: Amendment 39-16287. Docket No. FAA-2010-0129;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-245-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective June 21,
2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Airbus Model A318-111, -112, -121, and -
122 airplanes; Model A319-111, -112, -113, -114, -115, -131, -132,
and -133 airplanes; Model A320-111, -211, -212, -214, -231, -232,
and -233 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -112, -131, -211, -212, -
213, -231, and -232 airplanes; certificated in any category; all
manufacturer serial numbers; except airplanes that have received
Airbus modification 37317 in production.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 24:
Electrical power.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    Several occurrences of loss of the AC [alternating current] BUS
1 have been reported which led in some instances to the loss of the
AC ESS [essential] BUS and DC [direct current] ESS BUS and connected
systems. The affected systems include multiple flight deck Display
Units (Primary Flight Display, Navigation Display and Upper
Electronic Centralised Aircraft Monitoring display).
    The reasons for these events have been investigated but have not
been fully established for all cases.
    Due to the range of system losses some crews reported difficulty
in establishing the failure cause during the events and,
consequently, the appropriate actions to be taken may not be
completed in a timely manner.
    The loss of multiple display units, if not corrected expediently
during a high workload period, potentially affects the capability of
the flight crew and could contribute to a loss of situational
awareness and consequent control of the aeroplane, which would
constitute an unsafe condition.
    This AD therefore mandates the modification of the electrical
network configuration management logic consisting in adding an
automatic switching of the AC and DC ESS BUS power supply such that
upon the loss of the AC BUS 1, the AC BUS 2 will automatically take
over the power supply. On pre-MOD aeroplanes, this power supply
switching can only be accomplished manually from the cockpit and is
covered by an Electronic Centralized Aircraft Monitoring (ECAM)
procedure.

The modification of the electrical power distribution system
includes, depending on the configuration, adding a new circuit
breaker and new relay to the AC/DC ESS BUS circuit, and adding a
diode between a certain relay and terminal block.

Compliance

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

Actions

    (g) Within 48 months after the effective date of this AD, modify
the electrical power distribution system, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-24-1120,
Revision 03, dated July 10, 2009.
    (h) Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD,
in accordance with any service bulletin identified in Table 1 of
this AD, are considered acceptable for compliance with the
corresponding actions specified in this AD.

                                       Table 1--Credit service information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Airbus Service Bulletin--                     Revision--                            Dated--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A320-24-1120..........................  Original...........................  May 31, 2007.
A320-24-1120..........................  01.................................  December 19, 2007.
A320-24-1120..........................  02.................................  July 8, 2008.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows:
    No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (i) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to Attn: Tim
Dulin, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington
98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies,
notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or principal
avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a principal
inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office. The AMOC
approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (j) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)
Airworthiness Directive 2009-0235, dated October 29, 2009; and
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-24-1120, Revision 03, dated July 10,
2009; for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (k) You must use Airbus Service Bulletin A320-24-1120, Revision
03, dated July 10, 2009, to do the actions required by this AD,
unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5
61 93 44 51; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.airbus.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 27, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-10722 Filed 5-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 197 (Friday, October 13, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 47623]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21959]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2017-0808]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Patapsco River, Northwest and Inner Harbors;
Baltimore, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is correcting a temporary final rule that
appeared in the Federal Register on October 3, 2017. The document
issued a temporary safety zone for certain waters of the Patapsco
River, Northwest Harbor and Inner Harbor in association with the
movement of the historic sloop-of-war USS CONSTELLATION on October 26,
2017 (rain date of October 27, 2017).

DATES: This correction is effective from 8 a.m. on October 26, 2017,
through 1 p.m. on October 27, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Ronald L. Houck, at Sector Maryland-National Capital
Region, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 410-
576-2674, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 2017-21180 appearing on page
45981 of Wednesday, October 3, 2017, the following corrections are
made:

Sec.  165.T05-0808   [Corrected]

0
1. On page 45984, in the 1st column, in Sec.  165.T05-0808, correct
paragraph (e) to read as follows:
    ``(e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 8 a.m.
through 1 p.m. on October 26, 2017, and, if necessary due to inclement
weather, from 8 a.m. through 1 p.m. on October 27, 2017.''

    Dated: October 4, 2017.
Lonnie P. Harrison, Jr.
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National
Capital Region.
[FR Doc. 2017-21959 Filed 10-12-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: October 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 197)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 58016-58020]
[DOCID:fr12oc07-6]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2007-0360-200737; FRL-8478-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Florida; Clean
Air Interstate Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve a revision to the
Florida State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on March 16, 2007.
This revision addresses the requirements of EPA's Clean Air Interstate
Rule (CAIR) promulgated on May 12, 2005, and subsequently revised on
April 28, 2006, and December 13, 2006. EPA has determined that the SIP
revision fully implements the CAIR requirements for Florida. As a
result of this action, EPA will also withdraw, through a separate
rulemaking, the CAIR Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) concerning
sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX)
annual, and NOX ozone season emissions for Florida. The CAIR
FIPs for all States in the CAIR region were promulgated on April 28,
2006, and subsequently revised on December 13, 2006.
    CAIR requires States to reduce emissions of SO2 and
NOX that significantly contribute to, and interfere with
maintenance of, the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for
fine particulates (PM2.5) and/or ozone in any downwind
state. CAIR establishes State budgets for SO2 and
NOX and requires States to submit SIP revisions that
implement these budgets in States that EPA concluded did contribute to
nonattainment in downwind states. States have the flexibility to choose
which control measures to adopt to achieve the budgets, including
participating in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade programs. In the
SIP revision that EPA is approving today, Florida has met the CAIR
requirements by electing to participate in the EPA-administered cap-
and-trade programs addressing SO2, NOX annual,
and NOX ozone season emissions.

DATES: This rule is effective on November 13, 2007.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R04-OAR-2007-0360. All documents in the docket are listed on
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index,

some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not
placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at

the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stacy Harder, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, Region 4, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404)
562-9042. Ms. Harder can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What Action Is EPA Taking?
II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
III. What Are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
IV. Analysis of Florida's CAIR SIP Submittal
    A. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations
    B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs
    C. NOX Allowance Allocations
    D. Allocation of NOX Allowances From Compliance Supplement Pool
    E. Individual Opt-in Units
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Action Is EPA Taking?

    EPA is taking final action to approve a revision to Florida's SIP
submitted on March 16, 2007. In its SIP revision, Florida has met the
CAIR requirements by requiring certain electric generating units (EGUs)
to participate in the EPA-administered State CAIR cap-and-trade
programs addressing SO2, NOX annual, and
NOX ozone season emissions. Florida's regulations adopt by
reference most of the provisions of EPA's SO2,
NOX annual, and NOX ozone season model trading
rules, with certain changes discussed below. EPA has

determined that the SIP as revised will meet the applicable
requirements of CAIR. As a result of this action, the Administrator of
EPA will also issue a final rule to withdraw the FIPs concerning
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
emissions for Florida. The Administrator's action will delete and
reserve 40 CFR 52.540 and 40 CFR 52.541, relating to the CAIR FIP
obligations for Florida. The withdrawal of the CAIR FIPs for Florida is
a conforming amendment that must be made once the SIP is approved
because EPA's authority to issue the FIPs was premised on a deficiency
in the SIP for Florida. Once a SIP is fully approved, EPA no longer has
authority for the FIPs. Thus, EPA does not have the option of
maintaining the FIPs following full SIP approval. Accordingly, EPA does
not intend to offer an opportunity for a public hearing or an
additional opportunity for written public comment on the withdrawal of
the FIPs.
    EPA proposed to approve Florida's request to amend the SIP on
August 2, 2007 (72 FR 42344). In that proposal, EPA also stated its
intent to withdraw the FIP, as described above. The comment period
closed on September 4, 2007. EPA received one comment from a consortium
of regulated entities in support of our proposed approval. EPA is
finalizing the approval as proposed based on the rationale stated in
the proposal and in this final action.

II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?

    CAIR was published by EPA on May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). In this
rule, EPA determined that 28 States and the District of Columbia
contribute significantly to nonattainment and interfere with
maintenance of the NAAQS for PM2.5 and/or 8-hour ozone in
downwind States in the eastern part of the country. As a result, EPA
required those upwind States to revise their SIPs to include control
measures that reduce emissions of SO2, which is a precursor
to PM2.5 formation, and/or NOX, which is a
precursor to both ozone and PM2.5 formation. For
jurisdictions that contribute significantly to downwind
PM2.5 nonattainment, CAIR sets annual State-wide emission
reduction requirements (i.e., budgets) for SO2 and annual
State-wide emission reduction requirements for NOX.
Similarly, for jurisdictions that contribute significantly to 8-hour
ozone nonattainment, CAIR sets State-wide emission reduction
requirements for NOX for the ozone season (May 1 to
September 30). Under CAIR, States may implement these reduction
requirements by participating in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs or by adopting any other control measures.
    CAIR explains to subject States what must be included in SIPs to
address the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) with regard to interstate transport with respect to the 8-hour
ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA made national findings, effective
on May 25, 2005, that the States had failed to submit SIPs meeting the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D). The SIPs were due in July 2000,
three years after the promulgation of the 8-hour ozone and
PM2.5 NAAQS.

III. What Are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?

    CAIR establishes State-wide emission budgets for SO2 and
NOX and is to be implemented in two phases. The first phase
of NOX reductions starts in 2009 and continues through 2014,
while the first phase of SO2 reductions starts in 2010 and
continues through 2014. The second phase of reductions for both
NOX and SO2 starts in 2015 and continues
thereafter. CAIR requires States to implement the budgets by either:
(1) Requiring EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs; or (2) adopting other control measures of the State's
choosing and demonstrating that such control measures will result in
compliance with the applicable State SO2 and NOX
budgets.
    The May 12, 2005, and April 28, 2006, CAIR rules provide model
rules that States must adopt (with certain limited changes, if desired)
if they want to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs.
    With two exceptions, only States that choose to meet the
requirements of CAIR through methods that exclusively regulate EGUs are
allowed to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs. One
exception is for States that adopt the opt-in provisions of the model
rules to allow non-EGUs individually to opt into the EPA-administered
trading programs. The other exception is for States that include all
non-EGUs from their NOX SIP Call trading programs in their
CAIR NOX ozone season trading programs.

IV. Analysis of Florida's CAIR SIP Submittal

A. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations

    In this action, EPA is taking final action to approve Florida's SIP
revision that adopts the budgets established for the State in CAIR,
i.e., 99,445 (2009-2014) and 82,871 (2015-thereafter) tons for
NOX annual emissions, 47,912 (2009-2014) and 39,926 (2015-
thereafter) tons for NOX ozone season emissions, and 253,450
(2010-2014) and 177,415 (2015-thereafter) tons for SO2
emissions. Florida's SIP revision sets these budgets as the total
amounts of allowances available for allocation for each year under the
EPA-administered cap-and-trade programs.
    Florida has committed to revising the definitions of ``permitting
authority'' and ``State'' in its CAIR rules in order to ensure that
allowances issued by all States with approved rules providing for
participation in the respective EPA-administered cap-and-trade programs
are fungible and can be traded and used by all sources in all these
States, as intended. EPA determined after review of other States'
rules, but after Florida had adopted its CAIR rules, that there was an
issue related to these definitions when they refer only to a specific
State.
    In Florida's rules for CAIR, the EPA model trading rules were
revised to limit all references to ``permitting authority'' to refer to
the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Similarly,
references to ``State'' were limited to refer to Florida. These changes
are acceptable in most, but not all, instances under the current model
rules. In certain definitions in the model rules incorporated by
Florida (i.e., ``allocate'' or ``allocation,'' ``CAIR NOX
allowance,'' ``CAIR SO2 allowance,'' and ``CAIR
NOX Ozone Season allowance''), it is important that the term
``permitting authority'' cover permitting authorities in all States
that choose to participate in the respective EPA-administered trading
programs and that the term ``State'' cover all such States. This is
necessary to ensure that all allowances issued in each EPA-administered
trading program are fungible and can be traded and used for compliance
with the allowance-holding requirement in any State in the program.
    On May 24, 2007, EPA participated in a teleconference with Florida
and outlined necessary definition revisions. EPA received a letter from
Florida dated June 22, 2007, and a supplemental electronic mail
submission on July 11, 2007, that provide a commitment to make these
rule revisions in its CAIR rules in early 2008. Specifically, in the
June 22, 2007, letter and supplemental submission on July 11, 2007,
Florida commits to revising section 62-296.470(1) of Florida's rule to
state that: The limitation of the ``permitting authority'' definition
only to Florida does not apply when this term is used in the
definitions of `` `allocate' or `allocation','' ``CAIR NOX
allowance,'' ``CAIR SO2 allowance,'' and ``CAIR
NOX

Ozone Season allowance;'' and the limitation of the ``State''
definition only to Florida does not apply when the term is used in the
definitions of ``CAIR NOX allowance,'' ``CAIR SO2
allowance,'' and ``CAIR NOX Ozone Season allowance.''

B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs

    The CAIR NOX annual and ozone season model trading rules
both largely mirror the structure of the NOX SIP Call model
trading rule in 40 CFR part 96, subparts A through I. While the
provisions of the NOX annual and ozone season model rules
are similar, there are some differences. For example, the
NOX annual model rule (but not the NOX ozone
season model rule) provides for a compliance supplement pool (CSP),
which is discussed below and under which allowances may be awarded for
early reductions of NOX annual emissions. As a further
example, the NOX ozone season model rule reflects the fact
that the CAIR NOX ozone season trading program replaces the
NOX SIP Call trading program after the 2008 ozone season and
is coordinated with the NOX SIP Call program. The
NOX ozone season model rule provides incentives for early
emissions reductions by allowing banked, pre-2009 NOX SIP
Call allowances to be used for compliance in the CAIR NOX
ozone season trading program. In addition, States have the option of
continuing to meet their NOX SIP Call requirement by
participating in the CAIR NOX ozone season trading program
and including all their NOX SIP Call trading sources in that
program.
    The provisions of the CAIR SO2 model rule are also
similar to the provisions of the NOX annual and ozone season
model rules. However, the SO2 model rule is coordinated with
the ongoing Acid Rain SO2 cap-and-trade program under CAA
title IV. The SO2 model rule uses the title IV allowances
for compliance, with each allowance allocated for 2010-2014 authorizing
only 0.50 ton of emissions and each allowance allocated for 2015 and
thereafter authorizing only 0.35 ton of emissions. Banked title IV
allowances allocated for years before 2010 can be used at any time in
the CAIR SO2 cap-and-trade program, with each such allowance
authorizing one ton of emissions. Title IV allowances are to be freely
transferable among sources covered by the Acid Rain Program and sources
covered by the CAIR SO2 cap-and-trade program.
    EPA also used the CAIR model trading rules as the basis for the
trading programs in the CAIR FIPs. The CAIR FIP trading rules are
virtually identical to the CAIR model trading rules, with changes made
to account for federal rather than state implementation. The CAIR model
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
trading rules and the respective CAIR FIP trading rules are designed to
work together as integrated SO2, NOX annual, and
NOX ozone season trading programs.
    In the SIP revision, Florida has chosen to implement its CAIR
budgets by requiring EGUs to participate in EPA-administered cap-and-
trade programs for SO2, NOX annual, and NOX
ozone season emissions. Florida has adopted a full SIP revision (with
the commitment to adopt the revisions discussed above) that adopts,
with certain allowed changes discussed below, the CAIR model cap-and-
trade rules for SO2, NOX annual, and NOX
ozone season emissions.

C. NOX Allowance Allocations

    Under the NOX allowance allocation methodology in the
CAIR model trading rules and in the CAIR FIPs, NOX annual
and ozone season allowances are allocated to units that have operated
for five years, based on heat input data from a three-year period that
are adjusted for fuel type by using fuel factors of 1.0 for coal, 0.6
for oil, and 0.4 for other fuels. The CAIR model trading rules and the
CAIR FIPs also provide a new unit set-aside from which units without
five years of operation are allocated allowances based on the units'
prior year emissions.
    States may establish in their SIP submissions a different NOX
allowance allocation methodology that will be used to allocate
allowances to sources in the States if certain requirements are met
concerning the timing of submission of units' allocations to the
Administrator for recordation and the total amount of allowances
allocated for each control period. In adopting alternative NOX
allowance allocation methodologies, States have flexibility with regard
to: (1) The cost to recipients of the allowances, which may be
distributed for free or auctioned; (2) the frequency of allocations;
(3) the basis for allocating allowances, which may be distributed, for
example, based on historical heat input or electric and thermal output;
and (4) the use of allowance set-asides and, if used, their size.
    Florida has chosen to adopt the provisions of the CAIR NOX
annual model trading rule concerning the allocation of allowances based
on methodology that is similar, but not identical, to that in the CAIR
model trading rule for existing and new units. Under Florida's rule and
the CAIR model rule, existing units are allocated NOX
allowances in proportion to their ``fuel-adjusted control period heat
input'' during the baseline period. However, in addition to the fuel
adjustment factors used to calculate adjusted heat input in the CAIR
model rule, Florida has also developed a separate 150% fuel factor for
existing biomass-fired units that use best available control technology
(BACT). Further, in Florida's rule, as in the CAIR model rule, new
units are allocated NOX allowances in proportion to their
``converted control period heat input.'' However, unlike the CAIR model
rule, Florida's rule categorizes new units as those commencing
operation on or after January 1, 2007, (rather than January 1, 2001),
and establishes a new unit set set-aside of five percent for all
control years (rather than five percent through 2014 and three percent
thereafter). Moreover, under Florida's rule, allocations are scheduled
to be made in 2006, 2009, and every three years thereafter, with three-
year blocks of allocations being made generally four years in advance.
Florida's rule also limits the number of years for which permanently
retired units are allocated allowances after retirement.
    Florida has chosen to replace the provisions of the CAIR NOX
ozone season model trading rule concerning allowance allocations with
its own methodology. Florida has chosen to distribute NOX
ozone season allowances based upon the same allowance allocation
methodology described above for NOX annual allowances. EPA
is taking final action to approve these variations from the model rule
provisions because the changes are consistent with the flexibility that
CAIR provides States with regard to allocation methodologies.

D. Allocation of NOX Allowances From Compliance Supplement Pool

    CAIR establishes a compliance supplement pool to provide an
incentive for early reductions in NOX annual emissions. The
CSP consists of 200,000 CAIR NOX annual allowances of
vintage 2009 for the entire CAIR region, and a State's share of the CSP
is based upon the projected magnitude of the emission reductions
required by CAIR in that State. States may distribute CSP allowances,
one allowance for each ton of early reduction, to sources that make
NOX reductions during 2007 or 2008 beyond what is required
by any applicable State or federal emission limitation. States also may
distribute CSP allowances based upon a demonstration of need for an
extension of the 2009 deadline for implementing emission controls.

    The CAIR annual NOX model trading rule establishes
specific methodologies for allocations of CSP allowances. States may
choose an allowed, alternative CSP allocation methodology to be used to
allocate CSP allowances to sources in the States.
    Florida has chosen to distribute CSP allowances using the
allocation methodology provided in 40 CFR 96.143, and has adopted this
section by reference.

E. Individual Opt-In Units

    The opt-in provisions of the CAIR SIP model trading rules allow
certain non-EGUs (i.e., boilers, combustion turbines, and other
stationary fossil-fuel-fired devices) that do not meet the
applicability criteria for a CAIR trading program to participate
voluntarily in (i.e., opt into) the CAIR trading program. A non-EGU may
opt into one or more of the CAIR trading programs. In order to qualify
to opt into a CAIR trading program, a unit must vent all emissions
through a stack and be able to meet monitoring, recordkeeping, and
recording requirements of 40 CFR part 75. The owners and operators
seeking to opt a unit into a CAIR trading program must apply for a CAIR
opt-in permit. If the unit is issued a CAIR opt-in permit, the unit
becomes a CAIR unit, is allocated allowances, and must meet the same
allowance-holding and emissions monitoring and reporting requirements
as other units subject to the CAIR trading program. The opt-in
provisions provide for two methodologies for allocating allowances for
opt-in units, one methodology that applies to opt-in units in general
and a second methodology that allocates allowances only to opt-in units
that the owners and operators intend to repower before January 1, 2015.
    States have several options concerning the opt-in provisions.
States may adopt the CAIR opt-in provisions entirely or may adopt them
but exclude one of the methodologies for allocating allowances. States
may also decline to adopt the opt-in provisions at all.
    Florida has chosen not to allow non-EGUs meeting certain
requirements to opt into the CAIR trading programs.

V. Final Action

    EPA is taking final action to approve Florida's full CAIR SIP
revision submitted on March 16, 2007. Under this SIP revision, Florida
is choosing to participate in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs for SO2, NOX annual, and NOX
ozone season emissions. EPA has determined that the SIP revision meets
the applicable requirements in 40 CFR 51.123(o) and (aa), with regard
to NOX annual and NOX ozone season emissions, and
40 CFR 51.124(o), with regard to SO2 emissions. EPA has
determined that the SIP as revised will meet the requirements of CAIR.
The Administrator of EPA will also issue, without providing an
opportunity for a public hearing or an additional opportunity for
written public comment, a final rule to withdraw the CAIR FIPs
concerning SO2, NOX annual, and NOX
ozone season emissions for Florida. The Administrator's action will
delete and reserve 40 CFR 52.540 and 40 CFR 52.541. EPA will take final
action to withdraw the CAIR FIPs for Florida in a separate rulemaking.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves State law as meeting federal requirements and would
impose no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this action approves pre-existing requirements under State law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
State law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a State rule
implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA.
This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a State rule implementing a
federal standard.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by December 11, 2007. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 26, 2007.
J.I. Palmer, Jr.,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart (K)--Florida

0
2. Section 52.520(c) is amended in the table by revising the entry for
Section 62-210.200 in Chapter 62-210 and by adding in numerical order a
new entry in Chapter 62-296 to read as follows:

Sec.  52.520  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                                            EPA-Approved Florida Regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      State
            State citation                   Title/subject       effective date           EPA approval date                       Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Chapter 62-210 Stationary Requirements--General Sources
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
Section 62-210.200...................  Definitions.............      04/01/2007  10/12/07 [Insert citation of
                                                                                publication].

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Chapter 62-296 Stationary Sources--Emission Standards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 62-296.470...................  Implementation of             04/01/2007  10/12/07 [Insert citation of
                                        Federal Clean Air                         publication].
                                        Interstate Rule.

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

* * * * *
 [FR Doc. E7-19644 Filed 10-11-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 227 (Monday, November 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 70307]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28173]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2012-D-1038]

Guidance for Industry: Preclinical Assessment of Investigational
Cellular and Gene Therapy Products; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of a document entitled ``Guidance for Industry:
Preclinical Assessment of Investigational Cellular and Gene Therapy
Products'' dated November 2013. The guidance document provides sponsors
and individuals that design and implement preclinical studies with
recommendations on the substance and scope of preclinical information
needed to support clinical trials for investigational products reviewed
by the Office of Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies (OCTGT). The
product areas covered by this guidance are cellular therapy, gene
therapy, therapeutic vaccination, xenotransplantation, and certain
biologic-device combination products, which OCTGT reviews. The guidance
clarifies current expectations regarding the preclinical information
that would support an investigational new drug application (IND) and a
biologics license application (BLA) for these products. The guidance
announced in this notice finalizes the draft guidance of the same title
dated November 2012, and supersedes the recommendations in Section VIII
in the guidance entitled ``Guidance for Industry: Guidance for Human
Somatic Cell Therapy and Gene Therapy'' dated March 1998.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on Agency guidances
at any time.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single copies of the guidance to
the Office of Communication, Outreach and Development (HFM-40), Center
for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug
Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, Suite 200N, Rockville, MD 20852-
1448. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist the office in
processing your requests. The guidance may also be obtained by mail by
calling CBER at 1-800-835-4709 or<PHONE_NUMBER>. See the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for electronic access to the guidance document.
    Submit electronic comments on the guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tami Belouin, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (HFM-17), Food and Drug Administration, 1401
Rockville Pike, Suite 200N, Rockville, MD 20852-1448,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a document entitled
``Guidance for Industry: Preclinical Assessment of Investigational
Cellular and Gene Therapy Products'' dated November 2013. The guidance
document provides sponsors and individuals that design and implement
preclinical studies with recommendations on the substance and scope of
preclinical information needed to support clinical trials for
investigational products reviewed by OCTGT. The product areas covered
by this guidance include cellular therapy, gene therapy, therapeutic
vaccination, xenotransplantation, and certain biologic-device
combination products. The guidance is intended to clarify current
expectations regarding the preclinical information that supports an IND
and a BLA for these products.
    In the Federal Register of November 29, 2012 (77 FR 71194), FDA
announced the availability of the draft guidance of the same title
dated November 2012. FDA received numerous comments on the draft
guidance and those comments were considered as the guidance was
finalized. In response to these comments, several sections were
reorganized and editorial changes throughout the document were made to
improve clarity. The guidance announced in this notice finalizes the
draft guidance dated November 2012.
    The guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance
practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents FDA's
current thinking on this topic. It does not create or confer any rights
for or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the public. An
alternative approach may be used if such approach satisfies the
requirement of the applicable statutes and regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of
information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information
are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The
collections of information in 21 CFR part 312 have been approved under
OMB control number 0910-0014; the collections of information in 21 CFR
part 601 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0338; the
collections of information in 21 CFR part 58 have been approved under
OMB control number 0910-0119.

III. Comments

    Interested persons may submit electronic comments regarding this
document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

IV. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the guidance at
either http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm or http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: November 19, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-28173 Filed 11-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


Supporting Statement

for

Mandatory Ship Reporting System for the Northeast and Southeast

Coasts of the United States

OMB No.: 1625-0099

COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS:  Instruction

A.  Justification

1.  Circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.

Title 33 U.S.C. 1230(d) authorizes the establishment of mandatory ship
reporting systems.  Title 33 CFR part 169 prescribe the requirements of
the system.  The purpose of establishing the mandatory ship reporting
system is to reduce the likelihood of collisions between ships and
northern right whales.  The northern right whale is an endangered
species.  Previous to the establishment of the reporting system, there
were high mortality rates attributed to collisions with ships account
for up to 50% of all recorded deaths.  The populations of remaining
northern right whales are concentrated in two regions on the eastern
coast of the United States.  The northeastern mandatory reporting area
(WHALESNORTH) is located mainly off the coast of Massachusetts and is
primarily a feeding area for the whales.  The southeastern mandatory
reporting area (WHALESSOUTH) is located off the coasts of Georgia and
Florida and encompasses the species only known calving grounds for the
whales.

This information collection supports the following strategic goals:

Department of Homeland Security

Protection

Coast Guard

Protection of Natural Resources

Prevention Policy & Response Policy Directorates (CG-5P & CG-5R)

Human and Natural Environment: Eliminate environmental damage associated
with maritime transportation and operations on and around the nation’s
waterways.

2.  Purpose of the information collection.

This reporting requirement triggers issuance of information to the
mariner.  This information that includes warnings of the risk of hitting
northern right whales, where to obtain seasonal right whale advisories,
and where to consult for information about precautionary measures that
mariners may take to reduce the risk of hitting northern right whales.

3.  Consideration of the use of improved information technology.

This is an electronic information collection.  The mariner must report
when entering either of the reporting systems.  There are no forms or
recordkeeping requirements.  The information is sent via INMARSAT C,
TELEX, e-mail, SITOR, or voice radio.  Contact details are published
annually in the U.S. Coast Pilot.

We estimate that 100% of the reporting requirements can be done
electronically.  At this time, we estimate that 100% of the responses
are collected electronically.

4.  Efforts to identify duplication.

A vessel owner/operator must only report in once when first entering the
reporting system and is not responsible to report again when leaving.
This will minimize the burden on the mariner while providing increased
protection to the existing northern right whale populations.

5.  Methods to minimize the burden to small businesses if involved.

This information collection does not have an impact on small businesses
or other small entities.

6.  Consequences to the Federal program if collection were conducted
less frequently.

If the collection were collected less frequently, some vessels would
enter these critical zones without receiving instructions or avoidance
information and potentially hit a northern right whale.

7.  Special collection circumstances.

This information collection is conducted in manner consistent with the
guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2).

8.  Consultation.

A 60-Day Notice (See [USCG-2015-0692], August 13, 2015, 80 FR 48554) and
30-Day Notice (XX XX, 2015, 80 FR XXXXX) were published in the Federal
Register to obtain public comment on this collection.  The Coast Guard
has not received any comments on this information collection.

9.  Provide any payment or gift to respondents.

There is no offer of monetary or material value for this information
collection.

10.  Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents.

There are no assurances of confidentiality provided to the respondents
for this information collection.

11.  Additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature.

There are no questions of sensitive language.

12.  Estimates of annual hour and cost burdens to respondents.

The estimated number of annual respondents is 1,773.

The estimated number of annual responses is 2,334.

The estimated hour burden is 188 hours.

The estimated cost burden is $8,272.

The burden to respondents is provided in Appendix A.  The number of
respondents is the number of distinct vessels that enter WHALESNORTH and
WHALESSOUTH in a calendar year.  The number of responses is the number
of distinct reports received from vessels entering the system.  We
estimate that the time it takes a vessel operator to report that the
vessel is about to enter the system is 0.08 hours (about 5 min.).  The
position of vessel operator is analogous to a GS-07.  The wage rate used
is in accordance with the current edition of COMDTINST 7310.1(series)
for “Out-Government” personnel.

13.  Estimates of annualized capital and start-up costs.

There are no recordkeeping, capital, start-up or maintenance costs
associated with this information collection.

14.  Estimates of annualized Federal Government costs.

The estimated annual Federal Government cost is $22,000 (see Appendix
B).  The cost is based on government communications cost to operate the
system.

15.  Explain the reasons for the change in burden.

The change in burden hours is an ADJUSTMENT due to a change (i.e.,
decreased) in the estimated annual number of responses.  There is no
proposed change to the reporting requirements of this collection.  The
reporting requirements, and the methodology for calculating burden,
remain unchanged.

16.  Plans for tabulation, statistical analysis and publication.

This information collection will not be published for statistical
purposes.

17.  Approval for not explaining the expiration date for OMB approval.

The Coast Guard will display the expiration date for OMB approval of
this information collection.

18.  Explain each exception to the certification statement.

The Coast Guard does not request an exception to the certification of
this information collection.

B.  Collections of Information Employing Statistical Methods

This information collection does not employ statistical methods.

  Added by section 313 of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1998
[Pub. L. 105-383; 112 STAT. 3411; Nov. 13, 1998].

1625-0103

  PAGE  2  of   NUMPAGES  3


[Federal Register: January 14, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 9)]
[Notices]
[Page 2079-2080]
[DOCID:fr14ja09-71]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0544]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Record Retention
Requirements for the Soy Protein and Risk of Coronary Heart Disease
Health Claim

AGENCY:  Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:  Notice.

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

SUMMARY:  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by
February 13, 2009.

ADDRESSES:  To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or e-mailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0428.
Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonna Capezzuto, Office of Information
Management (HFA-710), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane,
Rockville, MD 20857,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Record Retention Requirements for the Soy Protein and Risk of Coronary
Heart Disease Health Claim--(OMB Control Number 0910-0428--Extension)

    Section 403(r)(3)(A)(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(21 U.S.C. 343(r)(3)(A)(i)) provides for the use of food label
statements characterizing a relationship of any nutrient of the type
required to be in the label or labeling of the food to a disease or a
health-related condition only where that statement meets the
requirements of the regulations issued by the Secretary of Health and
Human Services to authorize the use of such a health claim. Section
101.82 (Sec.  101.82) of FDA's regulations authorizes a health claim
for food labels about soy protein and the risk of coronary heart
disease. To bear the soy protein/coronary heart disease health claim,
foods must contain at least 6.25 grams of soy protein per reference
amount customarily consumed. Analytical methods for measuring total
protein can be used to quantify the amount of soy protein in foods that
contain soy as the sole source of protein. However, at the present time
there is no validated analytical methodology available to quantify the
amount of soy protein in foods that contain other sources of protein.
For these latter foods, FDA must rely on information known only to the
manufacturer to assess compliance with the requirement that the foods
contain the qualifying amount of soy protein. Thus, FDA requires
manufacturers to have and keep records to substantiate the amount of
soy protein in a food that bears the health claim and contains sources
of protein other than soy, and to make such records available to
appropriate regulatory officials upon written request. The information
collected includes nutrient databases or analyses, recipes or
formulations, purchase orders for ingredients, or any other information
that reasonably substantiates the ratio of soy protein to total
protein.
    In the Federal Register of October 23, 2008 (73 FR 63157), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the information
collection provisions. No comments were received.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                               Table 1.--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Annual Frequency
  21 CFR Section         No. of              per            Total Annual    Hours per  Record     Total Hours
                     Recordkeepers      Recordkeeping         Records
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
101.82(c)(2)(ii)(                 25                  1                 25                  1                 25
 B)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costsassociated with this collection of information.

    Based upon the agency's experience with the use of health claims,
FDA estimates that only about 25 firms would be likely to market
products bearing a soy protein/coronary heart disease health claim and
that only, perhaps, one of each firm's products might contain non-soy
sources of protein along with soy protein. The records required to be
retained by Sec.  101.82(c)(2)(ii)(B) are the records, e.g., the
formulation or recipe, that a manufacturer has and maintains as a
normal course of its doing business. Thus, the burden to the food
manufacturer is that involved in assembling and providing the records
to appropriate regulatory officials for review or copying.

    Dated: January 7, 2009.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E9-573 Filed 1-13-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register: January 29, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 18)]
[Notices]
[Page 5157]
[DOCID:fr29ja09-42]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP08-591-000]

Equitrans, L.P.; Notice of Technical Conference

January 23, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission Staff will convene a technical
conference in the above-referenced proceedings on Wednesday, January
28, 2009, at 10 a.m. (EST), in a room to be designated at the offices
of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    On August 29, 2008, Equitrans, L.P. (Equitrans) filed tariff sheets
to establish a new Tennessee Capacity Surcharge Tracker to recover
reservation charges incurred by Equitrans under a Gas Transportation
Agreement with Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (Tennessee) and establish
rules and procedures for Equitrans's shippers to utilize the Tennessee
capacity. On September 30, 2008, the Commission accepted and suspended
Equitrans's proposed tariff sheets, to become effective October 1,
2008, subject to refund and conditions, and further review.\1\
Following the Commission's September 30th Order, Commission Staff
issued two data requests to which Equitrans responded. On January 6,
2009, after its second response, Equitrans filed a motion for a
technical conference to clarify and resolve issues raised by Commission
Staff in the data requests before Commission Staff makes a
recommendation to the Commission. During the technical conference,
Commission Staff and interested persons will have the opportunity to
discuss all of the issues raised by Equitrans's filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Equitrans, L.P., 124 FERC ] 61,310 (2008) (September 30th
Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free (866) 208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a fax to<PHONE_NUMBER>
with the required accommodations.
    All interested persons are permitted to attend. For further
information please contact Anna Fernandez at<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-1888 Filed 1-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 186)]
[Notices]
[Page 49426-49428]
[DOCID:fr28se09-114]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-60698; File No. SR-NYSEAmex-2009-61]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Amex, LLC; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1, Implementing a Fee for Complex Orders to Its Schedule
of Fees and Charges for Exchange Services

September 21, 2009.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on September 9, 2009, NYSE Amex, LLC (the ``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
Amex'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by NYSE Amex. NYSE Amex
filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposal on September 18, 2009.\3\ NYSE
Amex filed the proposed rule change, as amended, pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \4\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) thereunder,\5\ which
renders the proposed rule change, as amended, effective upon filing
with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Amendment No. 1 revises the proposal to: (1) Correct an
example in the purpose section of the proposal of the fee applicable
when one firm represents both sides of a transaction; and (2)
provide additional discussion of the statutory basis for the
proposal.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \5\ 17 CFR 19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend the section of its Schedule of Fees
and Charges for Exchange Services (the ``Schedule''). While changes to
the Schedule pursuant to this proposal will be effective upon filing,
the changes will become operative on September 9, 2009. The amended
section of the Schedule is included as Exhibit 5 hereto. A copy of this
filing is available on the Exchange's Web site at http://www.nyse.com,
at the Exchange's principal office, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The self-regulatory organization has prepared summaries,
set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant
aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    Pursuant to a recent rule filing \6\ the Exchange will be
introducing automated complex order trading for all market participants
on NYSE Amex. In conjunction with this new functionality, the Exchange
proposes to introduce two new transaction fees specific to Complex
Order executions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 60554 (August
21, 2009) 74 FR 43737 (August 27, 2009) (Order granting accelerated
approval of NYSEAmex-2009-42).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Complex Orders that are executed against other similar Complex
Orders will be subject to a transaction fee of $0.10 per contract. For
example, if a Complex Order, comprised of two legs, executes against a
similar two-legged Complex Order, each market participant will be
charged $0.20 ($0.10 per contract). To expand on this example, if the
same strategy is executed a total of ten (10) times, each participant
would be charged $2.00. If a Complex Order comprised of three legs
executes against a similar three-legged Complex Order then each
participant would be charged $0.30, for the transaction. To expand on
this example, if the same three-legged

Complex Order is executed a total of ten (10) times, each participant
would be changed $3.00. All electronically executed Complex Orders,
regardless of whether they are entered by Market Makers, Brokers
Dealers, or OTP Firms representing Public Customers, will be billed
this same rate when their order is executed against another Complex
Order.
    The Exchange proposes a separate fee for electronically executed
Complex Orders when the same member firm represents both sides of the
transaction. Complex Orders, entered by a firm that trade against a
similar Complex Order represented by the same firm, will be subject to
a transaction fee of $0.05 per contract side. For example, if a Complex
Order comprised of two legs is entered by Firm A, and executes against
a similar two-legged Complex Order also for Firm A, the firm will be
charged a total of $0.20 (four contracts at $.05 per contract), for
each time the complex order strategy is executed. To expand on this
example, if the same strategy is executed a total of ten (10) times,
the firm would be subject to a transaction fee of $1.00 per Complex
Order, and since the same firm is a party to both sides of the
transaction, they would be charged a total of $2.00. If a Complex Order
entered by Firm A, which is comprised of three legs, executes against a
similar three-legged Complex Order entered by Firm A, then the firm
would be charged $0.30, for each time the three legged Complex Order is
executed. To expand on this example, if the same three-legged Complex
Order is executed a total of ten (10) times, the firm would be subject
to a transaction fee of $1.50 per Complex Order, and since the firm
represents both sides of the transaction, they would be charged a total
of $3.00.
    There may be occasions where a Complex Order will not execute
against a similar contra-side Complex Order, but instead will execute
against the individual leg markets represented by quotes and/or orders
in the Consolidated Book. This scenario will occur when the best price
for the Complex Order strategy is actually represented by a combination
of individual quotes and/or orders, resting in the Consolidated Book.
In situations where Complex Orders are executed utilizing two or more
individual quotes or orders from the Consolidated Book, standard
transaction fees, as shown on the Schedule, will apply to all
participants on the trade. Additionally, standard Marketing Charges
apply to all electronic complex order executions.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed changes to the Schedule are
equitable in that they apply uniformly to all similarly situated Users.
Additionally, the proposed fees are the same as those currently charged
by NYSE Arca.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 58473 (September
8, 2008) 73 FR 53312 (September 15, 2008) (Notice of filing and
immediate effectiveness for SR-NYSEArca-2008-97).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act, in general, and Section 6(b)(4), in particular, in
that it provides for the equitable allocation of dues, fees and other
charges among its members. The Exchange believes that the proposed
rates are reasonable. The proposed rate structure is part of the
Exchange's efforts to attract and enhance participation on the
Exchange, with respect to the implementation of electronic complex
order trading. The Exchange also believes that the proposed changes to
the Fee Schedule are equitable in that they apply uniformly to all
market participants on NYSE Amex.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change, as amended, has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2) \9\
thereunder because it establishes a due, fee, or other charge imposed
by NYSE Amex.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 5 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, as amended, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Commission considers the 60-day period within which the
Commission may summarily abrogate the proposal pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(C) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(C), to commence on
September 18, 2009, the date NYSE Amex filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, as amended, is consistent with the Act. Comments may be
submitted by any of the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEAmex-2009-61 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAmex-2009-61. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours
of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of NYSEAmex. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEAmex-2009-61 and should
be submitted on or before October 19, 2009.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-23306 Filed 9-25-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 245 (Friday, December 20, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 77118]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30317]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER14-612-000]

Skylar Energy LP; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Skylar Energy LP's application for market-based rate authority, with an
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is January 6, 2014.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 16, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-30317 Filed 12-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 92 (Friday, May 11, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 22113]
[FR Doc No: 2018-10143]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Availability of the Cleveland/Detroit Metroplex Final
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact/Record of
Decision

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of availability of Final Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact/Record of Decision.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is issuing this
notice to advise the public that it has published a Final Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No Significant/Record of Decision for the
Cleveland/Detroit Metroplex project.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory L. Hines, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177, email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA has prepared a Final Environmental Assessment (EA) to
assess the potential environmental impacts of the Cleveland/Detroit
Metroplex project in compliance with the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. This notice announces that based on
the information and analysis contained in the Final EA, the FAA is
issuing a Finding of No Significant Impact and Record of Decision
(FONSI/ROD) for the project. The Final EA and FONSI/ROD document the
FAA's determination that the project, as proposed, would not
significantly affect the quality of the human environment and that an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is therefore not necessary. The
FONSI/ROD documents the FAA's decision to proceed with the preferred
alternative detailed in the EA. The Cleveland/Detroit Metroplex project
will improve the efficiency of the national airspace system in the
Cleveland-Detroit area by optimizing aircraft arrival and departure
procedures at 12 Cleveland-Detroit area airports.
    Availability: The Final EA and FONSI/ROD are available for public
review at: (1) Online http://www.metroplexenvironmental.com/cle_dtw_metroplex/cle_dtw_docs.html. (2) Electronic versions of the
Final EA and FONSI/ROD are available at 69 libraries in the General
Study Area. A complete list of libraries with electronic copies of the
Final EA and FONSI/ROD is available online http://www.metroplexenvironmental.com/cle_dtw_metroplex/cle_dtw_introduction.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on May 7, 2018.
Christopher L. Southerland,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO, Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2018-10143 Filed 5-10-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P