[Federal Register: October 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 207)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 55493-55495]
[DOCID:fr28oc09-22]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0995; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-123-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

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

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

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

    Investigation into a landing gear retraction problem on a
production test flight revealed that, during aircraft pressurization
and depressurization cycles, the pressure floor in the main landing
gear bay deflects to a small extent. This causes relative
misalignment between the [alternate-extension system] AES bypass
valve, the downlock assist valve and the summing lever which, in
turn, can result in damage to and potential failure of the
respective clevis attached to one or both of the valves. Such a
clevis failure could remain dormant and, in the subsequent event
that use of the AES was required, full landing gear extension may
not be achievable.
* * * * *
The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 14,
2009.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., 400 C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec
H4S 1Y9, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You
may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

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

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0995;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-123-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We have lengthened the 30-day comment period for proposed ADs that
address MCAI originated by aviation authorities of other countries to
provide adequate time for interested parties to submit comments. The
comment period for these proposed ADs is now typically 45 days, which
is consistent with the comment period for domestic transport ADs.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-
2009-22, dated May 14, 2009 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''),
to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI
states:

    Investigation into a landing gear retraction problem on a
production test flight revealed that, during aircraft pressurization
and depressurization cycles, the pressure floor in the main landing
gear bay deflects to a small extent. This causes relative
misalignment between the [alternate-extension system] AES bypass
valve, the downlock assist valve and the summing lever which, in
turn, can result in damage to and potential failure of the
respective clevis attached to one or both of the valves. Such a
clevis failure could remain dormant and, in the subsequent event
that use of the AES was required, full landing gear extension may
not be achievable.
    This directive gives instructions to replace the clevis, with a
new part, for both the bypass and the downlock assist valves. It
also gives instructions to install new support brackets for both
valves, in order to increase the stiffness of the installations and
thus prevent future relative misalignment and potential clevis
failure.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Bombardier has issued Alert Service Bulletin A670BA-32-022,
Revision A, including Appendix A, dated May 1, 2009. The actions
described in this service information are intended to

correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

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

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 203 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that
it would take 12 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per
work-hour. Required parts would cost about $939 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 costs.
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 the proposed AD on U.S. operators to
be $385,497, or $1,899 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Bombardier Inc. (Formerly Canadair): Docket No. FAA-2009-0995;
Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-123-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by December 14, 2009.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the Bombardier airplanes identified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD, certificated in any
category.
    (1) Model CL-600-2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700 & 701) airplanes,
serial numbers 10003 through 10216 inclusive.
    (2) Model CL-600-2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705) and Model CL-
600-2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes, serial numbers 15001
through 15039 inclusive.

Subject

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

Reason

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

    Investigation into a landing gear retraction problem on a
production test flight revealed that, during aircraft pressurization
and depressurization cycles, the pressure floor in the main landing
gear bay deflects to a small extent. This causes relative
misalignment between the [alternate-extension system] AES bypass
valve, the downlock assist valve and the summing lever which, in
turn, can result in damage to and potential failure of the
respective clevis attached to one or both of the valves. Such a
clevis failure could remain dormant and, in the subsequent event
that use of the AES was required, full landing gear extension may
not be achievable.
    This directive gives instructions to replace the clevis, with a
new part, for both the bypass and the downlock assist valves. It
also gives instructions to install new support brackets for both
valves, in order to increase the stiffness of the installations and
thus prevent future relative misalignment and potential clevis
failure.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) For any bypass valve having part number (P/N) 53342-3, at
the applicable time in paragraph (f)(1)(i), (f)(1)(ii), or
(f)(1)(iii) of this AD, replace the existing clevis with a new
clevis having P/N 2323H037, in accordance with Part A of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin
A670BA-32-022, Revision A, dated May 1, 2009. The replacement is not
required if paragraph (f)(3) of this AD has already been done.
    (i) If the bypass valve has accumulated 9,400 total flight
cycles or fewer as of the effective date of this AD, replace the
clevis before the accumulation of 10,000 total flight cycles on the
valve.
    (ii) If the bypass valve has accumulated more than 9,400 total
flight cycles as of the effective date of this AD, replace the
clevis within 550 flight hours after the effective date of this AD.
    (iii) If it is not possible to determine the total flight cycles
accumulated on the bypass

valve, replace the clevis within 550 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD.
    (2) For any downlock assist valve having (P/N) 53341-5, at the
applicable time in paragraph (f)(2)(i), (f)(2)(ii), or (f)(2)(iii)
of this AD, replace the existing clevis with a new clevis, having P/
N 2323H037, in accordance with Part B of the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A670BA-32-022,
Revision A, dated May 1, 2009. The replacement is not required if
paragraph (f)(3) of this AD has already been done.
    (i) If the valve has accumulated 9,400 total flight cycles or
fewer as of the effective date of this AD, replace the clevis before
the valve has accumulated 10,000 total flight cycles on the valve.
    (ii) If the valve has accumulated more than 9,400 total flight
cycles as of the effective date of this AD, replace the clevis
within 550 flight hours after the effective date of this AD.
    (iii) If it is not possible to determine the total flight cycles
accumulated by the downlock assist valve, replace the clevis within
550 flight hours after the effective date of this AD.
    (3) At the earliest of the times in (f)(3)(i), (f)(3)(ii), and
(f)(3)(iii) of this AD, install new support brackets for the bypass
valve and downlock assist valve, in accordance with Part C of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin
A670BA-32-022, Revision A, dated May 1, 2009. Installing the support
brackets terminates the requirements of paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2)
of this AD.
    (i) Within 4,500 flight hours after the effective date of this
AD.
    (ii) Within 6,000 flight cycles after accomplishing the actions
specified in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD or within 600 flight cycles
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (iii) Within 6,000 flight cycles after accomplishing the actions
specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this AD or within 600 flight cycles
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later.
    (4) Replacing the clevises for the bypass valve and downlock
assist valve before the effective date of this AD, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Alert Service
Bulletin A670BA-32-022, dated November 8, 2007, is considered
acceptable for compliance with the corresponding actions in
paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD.

FAA AD Differences

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

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Cesar
Gomez, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch,
ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft Certification Office, 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone (516) 228-
7318; 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

    (h) Refer to MCAI Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2009-22,
dated May 14, 2009; and Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A670BA-32-
022, Revision A, dated May 1, 2009; for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 19, 2009.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E9-25866 Filed 10-27-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 71 (Wednesday, April 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20667-20668]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8549]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0115; FRL-8866-9]

Notice of Withdrawal of Pesticide Petitions for Residues of
Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the withdrawal of pesticide petitions
(0G7716, 8F7489, 9E7635, and 9F7587) proposing the establishment or
modification of regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or
on various commodities. The petitioners withdrew their petitions
voluntarily and without prejudice to future filing.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A contact person, with telephone
number and e-mail address, is listed at the end of each pesticide
petition summary. You may also reach each contact person by mail at
Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Although this action only applies to the petitioners listed in Unit
II., it is directed to the public in general. Since various individuals
or entities may be interested, EPA has not attempted to describe all
the specific entities that may be interested in this action. If you
have any questions regarding this action, please consult the person
listed at the end of the withdrawal summary for the pesticide petition
of interest.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0115. Publicly available
docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at
http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the
Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400,
One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The
hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket
Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is announcing the withdrawal of pesticide petitions filed under
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a, and proposing the establishment or modification of
regulations in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in
or on various food commodities.
    In accordance with 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of each of the
petitions covered by this notice, prepared by the petitioner, was
included in a docket EPA created for each rulemaking. The docket for
each of the petitions is available on-line at http://www.regulations.gov.

Withdrawal by Petitioner

    1. PP 0G7716 (Aspergillus flavus NRRL 21882). EPA issued a notice
in the Federal Register of September 30, 2010 (75 FR 60452) (FRL-8837-
2) (EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0547), which announced the filing of a pesticide
petition (PP 0G7716) by Circle One Global, Inc., P.O. Box 18300,
Greensboro, NC 27409. This petition proposed that EPA amend 40 CFR
180.1254 by establishing a temporary exemption from the requirement of
a tolerance for residues of the fungicide, Aspergillus flavus NRRL
21882, in or on cotton. On October 11, 2010, Circle One Global, Inc.,
notified EPA that it was withdrawing this petition. Contact: Shanaz
Bacchus; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    2. PP 8F7489 (2-phenethyl propionate). EPA issued a notice in the
Federal Register of April 8, 2009 (74 FR 15976) (FRL-8409-4) (EPA-HQ-
OPP-2009-0222), which announced the filing of a pesticide petition (PP
8F7489) by EcoSmart Technologies, Inc., 3600 Mansell Rd., Suite 150,
Alpharetta, GA 30022. This petition proposed that EPA amend 40 CFR part
180 by establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance
for residues of the biochemical pesticide, 2-phenethyl propionate, in
or on all agricultural commodities. On March 9, 2010, EcoSmart
Technologies, Inc., notified EPA that it was withdrawing this petition.
Contact: Cheryl Greene; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. PP 9E7635 (Tobacco mild green mosaic tobamovirus). EPA issued a
notice in the Federal Register of March 10, 2010 (75 FR 11171) (FRL-
8810-8) (EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0055), which announced the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 9E7635) by Interregional Research Project Number
4 (IR-4), Rutgers University, 500 College Rd., East, Suite 201W.,
Princeton, NJ 08540 (on behalf of BioProdex, Inc., 8520 NW 2 Place,
Gainesville, FL 32607-1423). This petition proposed that EPA amend 40
CFR part 180 by establishing an exemption from the requirement of a
tolerance for residues of the herbicide, Tobacco mild green mosaic
tobamovirus, in or on all food commodities. On January 10, 2011,
BioProdex, Inc., notified EPA that it was withdrawing this petition.
Contact: Jeannine Kausch; telephone number:

(703) 347-8920; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    4. PP 9F7587 (Paecilomyces fumosoroseus strain FE 9901). EPA issued
a notice in the Federal Register of March 10, 2010 (75 FR 11171) (FRL-
8810-8) (EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0092), which announced the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 9F7587) by Technology Sciences Group, Inc., 1150
18th St., NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20036 (on behalf of Natural
Industries, Inc., 6223 Theall Rd., Houston, TX 77066). This petition
proposed that EPA amend 40 CFR part 180 by establishing an exemption
from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of the
mycoinsecticide, Paecilomyces fumosoroseus strain FE 9901, in or on
vegetable and herb crops grown in greenhouses. On February 17, 2011,
Technology Sciences Group, Inc., notified EPA that it was withdrawing
this petition. Contact: Kathleen Martin; telephone number: (703) 308-
2857; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: March 25, 2011.
Keith A. Matthews,
 Acting Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division,
Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-8549 Filed 4-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: May 11, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 89)]
[Notices]
[Page 21791-21792]
[DOCID:fr11my09-484]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13389-000]

Northeast Hydrodevelopment, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

May 4, 2009.
    On March 6, 2009, Northeast Hydrodevelopment, LLC filed an
application, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act,
proposing to study the feasibility of the McLane Dam Hydroelectric
Project, to be located on the Sauhegan River, in Hillsborough County,
New Hampshire. On April 7, 2009, the applicant filed a revised Exhibits
1 and 4-1, and a new Exhibit 4-3b for the McLane Dam Project.
    The proposed McLane Dam Project would be located along the Sauhegan
River channel below the existing outlet works at an existing dam owned
by the Town of Milford, New Hampshire. The existing dam is 191 feet
long and 19 feet high and impounds the Sauhegan River.
    The proposed project would consist of: (1) Either a new
approximately 80-foot-long power canal or penstock or a 1,100 foot-long
penstock located below the existing outlet facilities; (2) a new
powerhouse containing two or three submersible or tubular-type turbine-
generators with a total hydraulic capacity of 425 cubic feet per second
and a either a total installed generating capacity of 0.325 megawatts
(MW) or .450 MW; (3) a newly excavated 150-foot-long tailrace; (4) an
approximately 500-foot-long transmission line; (5) three feet of new
flashboards; and (6) appurtenant facilities. The McLane Dam Project
would have an estimated average annual generation of 1,400 megawatts-
hours (MWh) to 1,900 MWh, which would be sold to Public Service of New
Hampshire.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Norm Herbert, Manager, Northeast
Hydrodevelopment, LLC, 100 State Route 101A, Building C, Suite 270,
Amherst, New Hampshire 03031,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: John Ramer,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions

on the Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing'' link. If unable to
be filed electronically, documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file,
an original and eight copies should be mailed to: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. For more information on how to submit these types
of filings please go to the Commission's Web site located at http://
www.ferc.gov/filing-comments.asp. More information about this project
can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of Commission's Web
site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket
number (P-13389) in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3372.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-10846 Filed 5-8-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


From:
"Jones, DonnaLee"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Fri, 19 Aug 2022 18:41:13
To:
David Ailor<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Daly; Owen"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"French; Chuck"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Fruh; Steve"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Lin; Walter"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Mcginn; Kevin"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>'GABRIELLE RAYMOND'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"Shappley; Ned"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
RE: DRAFT LISTS OF COETF AND EPA "DO-OUTS" FROM YESTERDAY'S CALL ON 114 TESTING
1. Thank you for this information and attending to your to do list. I see the one remaining item on your list is "Follow-up on EPA request for information on composition/speciation of VOC from byproduct plant processes (LDAR program)."

In regard to the EPA list, we plan to respond to all items listed in your earlier email below, except #3, which we don't believe we agreed to do and I believe I addressed in my earlier email of 8/8/22 where I provided an EPA website for our ambient data. For the other EPA items, the team has provided a draft of our responses to Chuck French , who is reviewing the draft responses now. Chuck will need to discuss the responses with our division director before we can provide a response back to you. Hopefully, this will all happen next week. Sorry I can't be more definitive, but it's out of my hands now.

Hope you have a good weekend.

Regards,
Donna Lee Jones, Ph.D.
Senior Technical Advisor, Metals Sector
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Sector Policies and Programs Division / Metals & Inorganic Chemicals Group (D243-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711
Tele:<PHONE_NUMBER>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>
"Reasonableness never fails to be appreciated."  - anon.

Pronouns - She/Her/Hers
Salutation - Dr./Ms.

From: David Ailor<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Friday, August 19, 2022 3:19 PM
To: Daly, Owen<EMAIL_ADDRESS>French, Chuck<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Fruh, Steve<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Lin, Walter<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mcginn, Kevin<EMAIL_ADDRESS>'GABRIELLE RAYMOND'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Shappley, Ned<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: RE: DRAFT LISTS OF COETF AND EPA "DO-OUTS" FROM YESTERDAY'S CALL ON 114 TESTING

Hello again, Donna Lee.

I'm following up on two of the three COETF "do-outs" from our Tuesday, August 9 call to discuss the Coke Ovens ICR.  The two do-outs are (1) "Provide close-up images of battery bench showing safety hazards  -  tight spaces, moving equipment, etc." and (2) "Provide OSHA reports on previous injuries/fatalities."  What we are providing on each of these is discussed below:

1. Provide close-up images of battery bench showing safety hazards  -  tight spaces, moving equipment, etc.  During the August 9 call, EPA requested close-up images of the battery bench showing the potential safety hazards, including narrow spaces and areas where there is moving equipment on the bench.  Two example photos are included in the attached ".pdf" file (see "COETF Example Bench Photos.pdf").

2. Provide OSHA reports on previous injuries/fatalities.  EPA also requested that the COETF provide examples of OSHA incident reports for accidents on coke battery benches.  A ".pdf" file listing several examples is attached (see "Accident Report Detail _ Occupational Safety and Health Administration (SIC 3312).pdf").

Lastly, two of EPA's "do-outs" from the August 9 call are a "Response to COETF's letter requesting changes to the ICR schedule (expedited response requested)" and a "Response to COETF's letter requesting changes to the ICR scope."  Can you please advise when EPA will be providing responses to these time-sensitive requests?  The COETF would greatly appreciate knowing as soon as possible if EPA is making changes to the ICR scope and providing the requested extensions of time.

Thanks.  And, please contact me if you have any questions.  DCA

David C. Ailor, P.E.
President
American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute
25 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.Suite 800Washington, D.C. 20001
Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>
eFax.:<PHONE_NUMBER>
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>www.accci.org

From: David Ailor<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2022 4:59 PM
To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>'French, Chuck'<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>'Jones, DonnaLee'<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>'Mcginn, Kevin'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>'GABRIELLE RAYMOND'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>'Shappley, Ned'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: DRAFT LISTS OF COETF AND EPA "DO-OUTS" FROM YESTERDAY'S CALL ON 114 TESTING

Donna Lee et al.:

Thanks again for making the time to meet with the Coke Oven Environmental Task Force (COETF) yesterday to discuss 114 testing the Agency is requesting.  Below, as promised, are draft lists developed by the COETF inclusive of what we believe are the COETF and EPA "do-outs" from the call.  Please let us know ASAP of any errors/omissions you might identify.  Thanks, David Ailor

COETF Do-Outs:

1. Provide close-up images of battery bench showing safety hazards  -  tight spaces, moving equipment, etc.
2. Provide OSHA reports on previous injuries/fatalities
3. Follow-up on EPA request for information on composition/speciation of VOC from byproduct plant processes (LDAR program)

EPA Do-Outs:

1.	Response to COETF's letter requesting changes to the ICR schedule (expedited response requested)
2.	Response to COETF's letter requesting changes to the ICR scope
3.	Provide list of ambient monitoring stations for which EPA already has data 4.	If any interior/fenceline fugitive monitoring remains in the ICR, confirm whether method can be limited to passive samplers and fenceline locations reduced to 1-2 upwind and 1 downwind
5.	Confirm whether EPA will accept USS SCOT plant stack test data in lieu of performing new testing
6.	Confirm whether EPA will accept DTE/EES COG sample data in lieu of performing new testing

David C. Ailor, P.E.
President
American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute
25 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20001
Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>
eFax.:<PHONE_NUMBER>
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>www.accci.org


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 188 (Wednesday, September 28, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66705-66706]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23561]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

Order of Suspension of Trading

September 26, 2016.
    In the Matter of A.A. Importing Co., Inc.; ACM Corporation;
Alleghany Pharmacal Corp.; Amiworld, Inc.; BTHC XIV, Inc.; Buccaneer
Energy Corp.; CECO Filters, Inc.; Child World, Inc.; Comp Services
Inc.; Connohio, Inc.; Dadongnan Holding., Co.; Day & Meyer, Murray &
Young Corp.; DEI Holdings, Inc.; Diversified Thermal Solutions,
Inc.; Global Industries Corp.; Havaya Corp.; Helpeo, Inc.; Hua Ye
Gas Group Holding Co.; International Capital & Technology Corp.;
Kinemotive Corp.; Old Fashion Foods, Inc.; Peptide Technologies,
Inc.; PTI Holding, Inc.; Rancho Santa Monica Developments, Inc.;
Restaurant Acquisition Partners, Inc.; Richland Resources Corp.;
SMSA Humble Acquisition Corp.; SMSA Treemont Acquisition Corp.;
Stevens International, Inc.; Sur Ventures, Inc.; USA InvestCo
Holdings, Inc.; Whole Gold International Group Holding; Company;
Winter Sports, Inc.; Wintex Mill, Inc.; Wyndmoor Industries, Inc.;
Ya Zhu Silk, Inc.

    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate public information concerning the
securities of each of the issuers detailed below because questions have
arisen as to their operating status, if any. Each of the issuers below
is quoted on OTC Link operated by OTC Markets Group, Inc. The staff of
the Securities and Exchange Commission has independently endeavored to
determine whether any of the issuers below are operating. Each of the
issuers below either confirmed they were now private companies or no
longer in operation, or failed to respond to the staff's inquiry about
their operating status, did not have an operational address, or failed
to provide their registered agent with an operational address. The
staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission also determined that
none of the issuers below has filed any information with OTC Markets
Group, Inc. or the Securities and Exchange Commission for the past two
years.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Information
                                                             regarding
                    Issuer and ticker                        operating
                                                             status *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. A.A. Importing Co., Inc. (ANTQ)......................               3
2. ACM Corporation (ACMA) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>)..........               1
3. Alleghany Pharmacal Corp. (ALGY).....................               2
4. Amiworld, Inc. (AMWO) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>)...........               1
5. BTHC XIV, Inc. (BXII) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>)...........               1
6. Buccaneer Energy Corp. (BCCR)........................               1
7. CECO Filters, Inc. (CECF) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>).......               2
8. Child World, Inc. (CHWO).............................               1
9. Comp Services Inc. (CMPS) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>).......               1
10. Connohio, Inc. (CNNO)...............................               3
11. Dadongnan Holding., Co. (DGDH)......................               1
12. Day & Meyer, Murray & Young Corp. (DMMY)............               2
13. DEI Holdings, Inc. (DEIX) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>)......               2
14. Diversified Thermal Solutions, Inc. (DVTS) (CIK No.                1
<PHONE_NUMBER>)............................................
15. Global Industries Corp. (GBLS) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>).               1
16. Havaya Corp. (HVAY) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>)............               1
17. Helpeo, Inc. (HLPN) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>)............               1
18. Hua Ye Gas Group Holding Co. (HUAZ).................               1
19. International Capital & Technology Corp. (ICTC) (CIK               1
 No.<PHONE_NUMBER>)........................................
20. Kinemotive Corp. (KINO) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>)........               2
21. Old Fashion Foods, Inc. (OFFI)......................               2
22. Peptide Technologies, Inc. (PEPT) (CIK No.                         3
<PHONE_NUMBER>)............................................
23. PTI Holding, Inc. (PTIH) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>).......               1
24. Rancho Santa Monica Developments, Inc. (RSDV) (CIK                 3
 No.<PHONE_NUMBER>)........................................
25. Restaurant Acquisition Partners, Inc. (RAQP) (CIK                  1
 No.<PHONE_NUMBER>)........................................
26. Richland Resources Corp. (RRCH) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>)               1
27. SMSA Humble Acquisition Corp. (SMHQ) (CIK No.                      3
<PHONE_NUMBER>)............................................
28. SMSA Treemont Acquisition Corp. (SAQU) (CIK No.                    1
<PHONE_NUMBER>)............................................
29. Stevens International, Inc. (SVEIB) (CIK No.                       3
<PHONE_NUMBER>)............................................
30. Sur Ventures, Inc. (SVTY) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>)......               1
31. USA InvestCo Holdings, Inc. (USAV) (CIK No.                        3
<PHONE_NUMBER>)............................................
32. Whole Gold International Group Holding Company                     1
 (WGLD).................................................
33. Winter Sports, Inc. (WSPS) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>).....               2
34. Wintex Mill, Inc. (WTXM)............................               1
35. Wyndmoor Industries, Inc. (WYDM)....................               2
36. Ya Zhu Silk, Inc. (YZSK) (CIK No.<PHONE_NUMBER>).......               1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Below are explanations for each of the codes used in the above table:
1 = The staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission attempted to
  contact the issuer and either the staff did not receive a response to
  its letter, the letters were returned as undeliverable, or the
  registered agent responded that they had no forwarding address for the
  issuer.
2 = The staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission was able to
  contact the issuer, which informed the staff that it was now a private
  company.
3 = The staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission was able to
  contact the issuer, which informed the staff that it was no longer
  operating.

    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed companies.
    Therefore, it is Ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the
above-listed companies is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT
on September 26, 2016, through 11:59 p.m. EDT on October 7, 2016.

    By the Commission.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-23561 Filed 9-26-16; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 21, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 182)]
[Notices]
[Page 55365-55366]
[DOCID:fr21se05-62]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. EC05-126-000 et al.]

Sithe Energies, Inc., LLC, et al.; Electric Rate and Corporate
Filings

September 13, 2005.

    The following filings have been made with the Commission. The
filings are listed in ascending order within each docket
classification.

1. Sithe Energies, Inc., Sithe Energies U.S.A., Inc., Sterling Power,
Ltd., Sterling Power Partners, L.P., Seneca Power Corporation, Seneca
Power Partners, L.P., and Alliance Energy Group LLC

[Docket No. EC05-126-000]

    Take notice that on September 7, 2005, Sithe Energies, Inc.
(Sithe), Sithe Energies U.S.A., Inc. (Sithe U.S.A.), Seneca Power
Corporation, Seneca Power Partners, L.P. (the Seneca Partnership),
Sterling Power, Ltd., Sterling Power Partners, L.P. (the Sterling
Partnership), and Alliance Energy Group LLC (Alliance Energy)
(collectively, Applicants) submitted an amendment to an application
filed on August 15, 2005 requesting authorization pursuant to section
203 of the Federal Power Act for Alliance Energy to acquire all of the
interests in the Seneca Partnership and Sterling Partnership directly
and indirectly owned by Sithe and Sithe U.S.A. (the Transaction).
Applicants state that the amendment clarifies that Alliance Energy may
acquire the Sithe's interests in the Seneca and Sterling Partnerships
through its wholly-owned, Alliance Energy, New York LLC (Alliance
Energy NY), in which case Alliance Energy's interests in the
partnerships would be held indirectly through Alliance Energy NY.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on September 21, 2005.

2. Twelvepole Creek, LLC; American Electric Power Service Corporation;
and Appalachian Power Company

[Docket No. EC05-134-000]

    Take notice that on September 8, 2005, Twelvepole Creek, LLC
(Twelvepole Creek) and American Electric Power Service Corporation, on
behalf of its electric utility operating company affiliate Appalachian
Power Company (APCo) (collectively, Applicants), submitted pursuant to
section 203 of the Federal Power Act, a joint application seeking
authorization for the sale of jurisdictional facilities. Applicants
state that the application requests Commission authorization for the
transfer by Twelvepole Creek to APCo jurisdictional facilities
associated with the Ceredo generating station located in Ceredo, Wayne
County, West Virginia, and a related interconnection agreement.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 4, 2005.

3. TransCanada PipeLines Limited 779540 Alberta Ltd.; TransCanada
PipeLine USA Ltd.; TransCanada OSP Holdings Ltd.; and TCPL Power Ltd.

[Docket No. EC05-135-000]

    Take notice that on September 7, 2005, TransCanada PipeLines
Limited (TCLP) 779540 Alberta Ltd. (Dissolve Co.), TransCanada PipeLine
USA Ltd (TCPL USA), TransCanada OSP Holdings Ltd (TC OSP) and TCPL
Power Ltd (TCPL Power) (collectively, Applicants) filed an application
under section 203 of the Federal Power Act requesting authorization for
the dissolution of Dissolve Co, the transfer of shares of TC OSP from
TCPL to TCPL USA and the transfer of shares of TCPL Power to TC OSP in
order to effect a corporate reorganization.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on September 28, 2005.

4. Entergy Services, Inc.

[Docket No. EL05-149-000]

    Take notice that on September 2, 2005, Entergy Services, Inc., on
behalf of the Entergy Operating Companies (collectively, Entergy),
pursuant to Commission Rule 207, 18 CFR 385.207 (2005), petitioned for
an issuance of a Declaratory Order regarding Entergy's obligation to
pay third party generators for reactive power.
    Entergy states that copies of this filing have been served on all
customers under Entergy's Open Access Transmission Tariff and on
Entergy's retail regulators.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 3, 2005.

5. Southwest Transmission Cooperative, Inc.

[Docket No. NJ05-6-000]

    Take notice that on September 1, 2005, Southwest Transmission
Cooperative, Inc. (SWTC) tendered for

filing its revised Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT) in order to
update its OATT and to comply with Order No. 2003-C regarding large
generator interconnection, and to reestablish the compliance of its
OATT with the Commission's safe harbor and reciprocity standards.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 3, 2005.

6. Pacific Crest Power, LLC and Ridgetop Energy, LLC

[Docket Nos. QF92-55-007 and QF94-50-007]

    Take notice that on September 1, 2005, Pacific Crest Power, LLC and
Ridgetop Energy, LLC, filed with the Commission an application for
recertification of a facility as a qualifying small power production
facility pursuant to 18 CFR 292.207(b) of the Commission's regulations.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on September 28, 2005.

7. Cameron Ridge LLC

[Docket No. QF98-41-007]

    Take notice that on September 1, 2005, Cameron Ridge LLC, filed
with the Commission an application for recertification of a facility as
a qualifying small power production facility pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(b) of the Commission's regulations.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on September 28, 2005.

8. Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

[Dockets Nos. RT04-1-015 and ER04-48-015]

    Take notice that on September 7, 2005, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
(SPP) submitted an errata to Attachment AJ filing to the SPP Open
Access Transmission Tariff submitted on August 26, 2005 and on
September 12, 2005, SPP submitted another errata to the independent
Market Monitoring Services Agreement originally submitted on August 26,
2005. SPP requests an effective date of July 1, 2005 for its filings.
    SPP states that a copy of this filing has been served on all
persons on the official service list, as well as all state commissions.
SPP further states the filing has been posted electronically on SPP's
Web site at http://www.spp.org.

    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on September 20, 2005.

9. Tennessee Valley Authority

[Docket No. TX05-1-004]

    Take notice that on September 7, 2005, Tennessee Valley Authority
(TVA) submitted a compliance filing pursuant to Commission Orders April
14 and August 3, 2005, addressing interconnections flow service
agreement between TVA and East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 7, 2005.

Standard Paragraph

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is 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 e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-5138 Filed 9-20-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 138 (Monday, July 20, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42763-42765]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17736]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0133; FRL-9930-86-Region 4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Florida; Combs
Oil Company Variance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by
the State of Florida through the Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP) on July

31, 2009. The revision grants a variance to the Combs Oil Company,
located in Naples, Florida. This source specific revision relieves the
Combs Oil Company of the requirement to comply with the Florida rule
governing installation and operation of vapor collection and control
systems on loading racks at bulk gasoline plants. EPA is proposing
approval of Florida's July 31, 2009, SIP revision.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 19, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2015-0133, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0133,'' Air Regulatory Management
Section (formerly Regulatory Development Section), Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Air
Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch,
Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional
Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2015-0133. 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 through www.regulations.gov or
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
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. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    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 at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation 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 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Mr. Lakeman can be
reached via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Florida Rule 62-296.418 requires bulk gasoline plants which
began operation on or after August 1, 2007, to install and operate
vapor collection and control systems on their loading racks. The rule
became effective on May 9, 2007, and was submitted to EPA as a proposed
SIP revision on May 31, 2007. EPA approved the SIP revision on June 1,
2009 (74 FR 26103).
    On May 30, 2007, Combs Oil Company submitted a petition for
variance from the requirements of Rule 62-296.418(2)(b)2, Florida
Administrative Code (F.A.C.), for its new bulk gasoline plant. The
company operates an existing bulk gasoline plant in Naples, Florida.
The new plant would replace the existing plant and be constructed at a
different site in the area. However, between July 2005 and January
2007, the company experienced substantial construction delays beyond
its control due to the effects of hurricanes, both in Florida and along
the upper Gulf Coast. The company experienced delays in obtaining steel
for the office and loading/tank areas as well as the rationing of steel
rebar and concrete supplies. Combs Oil Company had invested $67,053 in
equipment and $40,235 in construction costs for the support structure
of the loading rack prior to the DEP's initiation of rule 62-
296.418(2)(b)2, requiring a vapor collection and control system on the
loading racks of new bulk gasoline plants. However, the company was
unable to complete construction and relocation of its plant by August
1, 2007, due to the aforementioned construction delays.
    Under Section 120.542 of the Florida Statutes, the DEP may grant a
variance when the person subject to a rule demonstrates that the
purpose of the underlying statute will be or has been achieved by other
means, or when application of a rule would create a substantial
hardship or violate principles of fairness. The DEP determined that
Combs Oil Company had demonstrated that principles of fairness would be
violated because the delays in building and relocating to the new
facility, related to hurricanes, were beyond the control of the
company. Therefore, the DEP issued an Order Granting Variance to Combs
Oil Company on August 20, 2008, relieving the company from the
requirements of Rule 62-296.418(2)(b)2., F.A.C., for its proposed new
facility.

II. Analysis of State Submittal

    Section 110(l) of the CAA requires that SIP revisions must not
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress. Like the facility it is replacing, the new
Combs Oil facility is located in Collier County in Southwest Florida.
Collier County has never been designated nonattainment for any air

pollutant and, thus, is not subject to any reasonable further progress
requirements. Air quality monitoring is currently available in the
county for ozone. A comparison of the Collier County data in relation
to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone is indicating
that value is well within the compliance level. The ozone design value
for 2011-2013 in Collier County is 0.060 parts per million (ppm).
    The proposed SIP revision involves emissions of volatile organic
compounds (VOC), a precursor to ozone. For fine particulate matter
(PM2.5), County-level nitrogen oxide, volatile organic
compound and ammonia emissions were not considered because ambient
PM2.5 concentrations in the southeastern U.S. tend to be
impacted most significantly by emissions of direct PM2.5
emissions and SO2 emissions. As a result of the time
involved in the chemical and physical transformations of the precursor
emissions, the primary impact of the source cannot be explicitly
determined but can be evaluated in terms of its addition to the county
and regional emissions from all sources in this area.
    The proposed source is currently operating in the county and is
simply moving a relatively short distance (1.6 miles) within the same
general area. Emissions of VOC from gasoline operations at the
relocated source are estimated to be the same as VOC emissions at the
existing facility, even when the increased storage capacity at the new
location is considered. Specifically, VOC emissions are estimated to be
less than 3 tons per year--minor in comparison to the county total of
31,816 tons per year. Since ozone concentration levels are currently
well below the ambient air quality standard of 0.075 ppm, and emissions
of VOC will not increase as a result of the relocation of this source,
EPA has preliminary determined that the variance will not interfere
with the area's ability to continue to maintain the ozone standards.
Thus, EPA has preliminarily determined that the changes are consistent
with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule,
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the ``Combs Oil Company Source Specific Variance'' order
granting variance on August 20, 2008. EPA has made, and will continue
to make, these documents generally available electronically through
www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office
(see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

IV. Final Action

    EPA is proposing to approve a source specific SIP revision
submitted by the Florida DEP on July 31, 2009. The revision grants a
variance to the Combs Oil Company, located in Naples, Florida. This
source specific revision relieves the Combs Oil Company of the
requirement to comply with the Florida rule governing installation and
operation of vapor collection and control systems on loading racks at
bulk gasoline plants. It should be noted that approval of the variance
for Combs Oil Company only relieves them from the requirements of Rule
62-296.418(2)(b)2 F.A.C., for its new bulk gasoline plant, it does not
relieve them from any requirements established in 40 CFR parts 60 and
63.

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 Act and applicable
federal regulations. See 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
proposed action merely approves a 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 Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Nitrogen dioxide,
Particulate Matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.

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

    Dated: July 6, 2015.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2015-17736 Filed 7-17-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 227 (Friday, November 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72834-72835]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29818]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0001]

Blood Products Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory
committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). At least one
portion of the meeting will be closed to the public.
    Name of Committee: Blood Products Advisory Committee.
    General Function of the Committee: To provide advice and
recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
    Date and Time: The meeting will be held on December 14, 2010, from
8 a.m. to approximately 5:30 p.m. and on December 15, 2010, from 8 a.m.
to approximately 12:45 p.m.
    Location: Hilton Washington DC/North, 620 Perry Pkwy.,
Gaithersburg, MD.
    Contact Person: Bryan Emery or Pearline Muckelvene, Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration (HFM-
71), 1401 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or FDA
Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in
the Washington, DC area), code<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please call the Information
Line for up-to-date information on this meeting. A notice in the
Federal Register about last minute modifications that impact a
previously announced advisory committee meeting cannot always be
published quickly enough to provide timely notice. Therefore, you
should always check the Agency's Web site and call the appropriate
advisory committee hot line/phone line to learn about possible
modifications before coming to the meeting.
    Agenda: On December 14, 2010, in the morning, the committee will
discuss the risk of dengue virus infection in blood donors. In the
afternoon, the committee will discuss murine leukemia virus-related
human retroviruses and blood safety. On December 15, 2010, in the
morning, the committee will hear updates on the following topics: (1)
November 4 and 5, 2010, meeting of the Health and Human Services
Advisory Committee on Blood Safety and Availability and (2) December 9
and 10, 2010, FDA workshop entitled ``Product Development Program for
Interventions in Patients With Severe Bleeding Due to Trauma and Other
Causes,'' and (3) Research programs in the Laboratories of Hemostasis
and Plasma Derivatives, Division of Hematology, Office of Blood
Research and Review, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research.
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is
available at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee link.
    Procedure: On December 14, from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. the meeting is
open to the public. On December 15, from 8 a.m. to 12 noon the meeting
is open to the public. Interested persons may present data,
information, or views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before
the committee. Written submissions may be made to the contact person on
or before December 7, 2010. Oral presentations from the public will be
scheduled between approximately 10:15 a.m. and 11 a.m. and between 3:45
p.m. and 4:15 p.m. on December 14, 2010, and between approximately
11:30 a.m. and 12 noon on December 15, 2010. Those individuals
interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the
contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of
the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses
of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time
requested to make their presentation on or before November 29, 2010.
Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of
registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably
accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may
conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open
public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested
persons regarding their request to speak by November 30, 2010.
    Closed Committee Deliberations: On December 15, from 12 noon to
12:45 p.m., the meeting will be closed to permit discussion where
disclosure would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal
privacy (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6)). The committee will discuss reports of
intramural research programs

and make recommendations regarding personnel staffing decisions.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special
accommodations due to a disability, please contact Bryan Emery at least
7 days in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: November 19, 2010.
Thinh Nguyen,
Acting Associate Commissioner for Special Medical Programs.
[FR Doc. 2010-29818 Filed 11-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 88 (Thursday, May 7, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26274-26275]
[FR Doc No: 2015-11003]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket Nos. FDA-2013-E-0968 and FDA-2013-E-0969]

Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent
Extension; OVUGEL

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the
regulatory review period for OVUGEL and is publishing this notice of
that determination as required by law. FDA has made the determination
because of the submission of applications to the Director of U.S.
Patents and Trademarks Office (USPTO), Department of Commerce, for the
extension of a patent which claims that animal drug product.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov.
Submit written petitions (two copies are required) and written comments
to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Submit petitions electronically to http://www.regulations.gov at Docket
No. FDA-2013-S-0610.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Friedman, Office of
Management, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave.,
Hillandale Bldg., Rm. 3180, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term
Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug
and Patent Term Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide
that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as
the patented item (human drug product, animal drug product, medical
device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory
review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a
product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the
amount of extension an applicant may receive.
    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A
testing phase and an approval phase. For animal drug products, the
testing phase begins on the earlier date when either a major
environmental effects test was initiated for the drug or when an
exemption under section 512(j) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360b(j)) became effective and runs until
the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial
submission of an application to market the animal drug product and
continues until FDA grants permission to market the drug product.
Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward
the actual amount of extension that the Director USPTO may award (for
example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any time
that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's
determination of the length of a regulatory review period for an animal
drug product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase
as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(4)(B).
    FDA has approved for marketing the animal drug product OVUGEL
(triptorelin acetate). OVUGEL, an animal drug product, is indicated for
the synchronization of time of insemination in weaned sows to
facilitate a single fixed-time artificial insemination. Subsequent to
this approval, the USPTO received patent term restoration applications
for OVUGEL (U.S. Patent Nos. 5,985,320 and RE 42,072) from Penn State
Research Foundation and Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the
USPTO requested FDA's assistance in determining the patents'
eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated March 25,
2014, FDA advised the Patent and Trademark Office that this animal drug
product had undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval
of OVUGEL represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use
of the product. Thereafter, the USPTO requested that the FDA determine
the product's regulatory review period.
    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for
OVUGEL is 3,692 days. Of this time, 3,644 days occurred during the
testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 48 days occurred
during the

approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the following
dates:
    1. The date an exemption under section 505(i) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) became
effective: August 12, 2002. The applicant claims February 13, 2002, as
the date the investigational new animal drug application (INAD) became
effective. However, FDA records indicate that the INAD effective date
was August 12, 2002, which was the date a major health or environmental
effects test is begun or the date on which the Agency acknowledges the
filing of a notice of claimed investigational exemption for a new
animal drug, whichever is earlier.
    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to
the animal drug product under section 512 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
360b): August 2, 2012. The applicant claims July 20, 2012, as the date
the new animal drug Application (NADA) for OVUGEL RE42072 (NADA 141-
339) was initially submitted. However, FDA records indicate that NADA
141-339 was submitted on August 2, 2012.
    3. The date the application was approved: September 18, 2012. FDA
has verified the applicant's claim that NADA 141-339 was approved on
September 18, 2012.
    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the
maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO
applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual
period for patent extension. In its applications for patent extension,
this applicant seeks 331 or 1,826 days of patent term extension.
    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are
incorrect may submit to the Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments and ask for a
redetermination by July 6, 2015. Furthermore, any interested person may
petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for
extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period
by November 3, 2015. To meet its burden, the petition must contain
sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part
1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the
format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.
    Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) electronic or written comments and written or
electronic petitions. 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. If you submit a written petition, two copies
are required. A petition submitted electronically must be submitted to
http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FDA-2013-S-0610.
    Comments and petitions that have not been made publicly available
on http://www.regulations.gov may be viewed in the Division of Dockets
Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    Dated: May 1, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-11003 Filed 5-6-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P