[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 86 (Friday, May 3, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19007-19012]
[FR Doc No: 2019-09111]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2018-0733; FRL-9993-26-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Redesignation of the Terre Haute
Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
redesignate the Terre Haute area from nonattainment to attainment for
the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) standard. The area consists of
Fayette and Harrison Townships in Vigo County, Indiana. EPA is also
proposing to approve Indiana's maintenance plan for this area.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 3, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2017-0733 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing

system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Samantha Panock, Environmental
Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. Background
II. Redesignation Requirements
    A. Determination of Attainment
    B. Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions
    C. Requirements for the Area Under Section 110 and Part D
    D. Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k)
    E. Maintenance Plan
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520), EPA published a revised primary
SO2 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) of 75
parts per billion (ppb), which is met at a monitoring site when the 3-
year average of the annual 99th percentile of daily maximum 1-hour
concentrations does not exceed 75 ppb. This NAAQS was codified at 40
CFR 50.4. On July 25, 2013 (78 FR 47191), EPA published its initial air
quality designations for the SO2 NAAQS based upon air
quality monitoring data for calendar years 2009-2011. In that action,
the Vigo County area comprised of Fayette and Harrison Townships was
designated nonattainment for the SO2 NAAQS (Terre Haute
nonattainment area).
    Indiana was required to submit a nonattainment State Implementation
Plan (SIP) that meets the requirements of sections 172(c) and 191-192
of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and provide for attainment of the
SO2 NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than
October 4, 2018, which represents five years after the area was
originally designated as nonattainment under the 2010 SO2
NAAQS. SO2 emissions from all sources within the
nonattainment area totaled 56,238 tons in 2011, and 2,662 tons in 2017.
Due to a variety of factors, including the retirement of all coal-fired
electric generating units at Wabash River Generating Station, there has
been a significant, permanent, and enforceable reduction in
SO2 emissions within the Terre Haute nonattainment area. In
addition, the area's SO2 monitors' 3-year SO2
design values \1\ for 2015-2017 had fallen below the SO2
NAAQS. Consequently, the Indiana Department of Environmental Management
(IDEM) submitted a redesignation request on October 24, 2018. For the
reasons set forth in this document, EPA is proposing to redesignate the
area to attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The design value is a statistic computed according to the
data handling procedures of the NAAQS (in 40 CFR part 50 appendix T)
that, by comparison to the level of the NAAQS, indicates whether the
area is violating the NAAQS. For SO2, the design value is
the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily
maximum concentrations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Redesignation requirements

    Under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E), there are five criteria which must
be met before a nonattainment area may be redesignated to attainment.
    1. EPA has determined that the relevant NAAQS has been attained in
the area.
    2. The applicable implementation plan has been fully approved by
EPA under section 110(k).
    3. EPA has determined that improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from the
SIP, Federal regulations, and other permanent and enforceable
reductions.
    4. EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan, including a
contingency plan, for the area under section 175A of the CAA.
    5. The State has met all applicable requirements for the area under
section 110 and part D.

A. Determination of Attainment

    For redesignation of a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). As stated in the April 2014
``Guidance for 1-Hour SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP
Submissions,'' for SO2, there are two components needed to
support an attainment determination: A review of representative air
quality monitoring data, and a further analysis, generally requiring
air quality modeling, to demonstrate that the entire area is attaining
the applicable standard, based on current actual emissions or the fully
implemented control strategy. Indiana has addressed both components.
    Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 50.17, the SO2 standard
is met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the 3-year
average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum
concentrations is less than or equal to 75 ppb, as determined in
accordance with appendix T of 40 CFR part 50, at all relevant
monitoring sites in the subject area. EPA has reviewed the ambient air
monitoring data for the Terre Haute nonattainment area. The Terre Haute
nonattainment area has two SO2 monitoring sites located in
Terre Haute--the Lafayette Avenue site and the Ft. Harrison Road site.
This review addresses air quality data collected in the 2015-2017
period, which are the most recent quality assured data available. All
data considered are complete, quality assured, certified, and recorded
in EPA's Air Quality System database.
    Table 1 shows the 2014-2017 design values for the Terre Haute
nonattainment area. The 3-year average design values for 2014-2016 are
71 ppb and 114 ppb, respectively, for the Lafayette Avenue and Ft.
Harrison Road monitoring sites. The 2015-2017 design values are 44 ppb
and 75 ppb, respectively. All design values for 2015-2017 are at or
below the SO2 standard. Therefore, the Terre Haute
SO2 monitors clearly show attainment. Preliminary data for
2018 indicate that the area continues to attain the SO2
standard.

                                      Table 1--Monitoring Data for the Terre Haute Nonattainment Area for 2014-2017
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Year and 99th percentile value (ppb)          3-Year design   3-Year design
                                                                     ----------------------------------------------------  values  2014-   values  2015-
                  Site                             Site name                                                                2016 (ppb)      2017 (ppb)
                                                                          2014         2015         2016         2017
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18-167-0018.............................  Lafayette Ave.............           85           71           58            3              71              44

18-167-1014.............................  Ft. Harrison Rd...........          120          103          120            3             114              75
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the second component of the attainment determination,
IDEM has performed extensive modeling of the Terre Haute nonattainment
area to determine the effect of local and national emission control
strategies on SO2 and to demonstrate attainment of the
SO2 NAAQS.
    A total of seven sources were included in the SO2
attainment demonstration and technical support document for the Terre
Haute nonattainment area submitted to EPA for review and approval on
October 2, 2015. These facilities are: (1) Duke Energy--Wabash River
Generating Station, (2) Wabash Valley Power Authority--Wabash River CC
Plant, (3) sqSolutions, (4) Sony DADC, (5) Taghleef Industries, (6)
Terre Haute Regional Hospital, and (7) Terre Haute Union Hospital.
    The American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency
Regulatory Model (AERMOD version 14134) was the regulatory air quality
model used for the 2010 SO2 attainment demonstration
modeling for the Terre Haute nonattainment area. Five years, 2008-2012,
of surface meteorological data from the Indianapolis, IN National
Weather Service (NWS) site was used in conjunction with five years of
concurrent upper-air meteorological data from Lincoln, Illinois.
    Several Federal rulemakings established allowable limits for the
seven sources listed previously. These rulemakings include the Cross
State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), Mercury and Air Toxics Standards
(MATS), and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Major Sources (NESHAP): Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional
Boilers and Process Heaters. These limits, which were adopted at 326
Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 7-4-3.1, have been applied to the
seven sources.
    The AERMOD modeling results for the Terre Haute nonattainment area
showed a maximum 1-hour SO2 concentration of 167.0
micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m3). When added to a background
concentration value of 23.0 [mu]g/m3, a total 1-hour SO2
concentration of 189.9 [mu]g/m3 is achieved. This is below the 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS of 75 ppb or 196.2 [mu]g/m3 and, therefore,
demonstrates attainment of the NAAQS for SO2.
    In summary, the monitored data show attainment for 2015-2017, and
IDEM has demonstrated, via modeling, that sources within the area are
not expected to cause future violations in the area because of the
permanent and enforceable limits that apply to those sources.
Therefore, EPA agrees that the Terre Haute nonattainment area is
currently attaining the SO2 NAAQS.

B. Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions

    To support the redesignation of an area from nonattainment to
attainment, section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA requires EPA to
determine that the air quality improvement in the area is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from the
implementation of the attainment demonstration and applicable Federal
air pollution control regulations as well as any other permanent and
enforceable emission reductions. As previously stated, the reduction in
emissions from the seven sources in the area has led to a decrease in
monitored levels. The controls and operational changes that were made
by the seven facilities, as well as unit retirements, resulted in
emission reductions for the nonattainment area between the 2011
nonattainment base year and the 2017 attainment year.
    Table 2 compares SO2 emissions for all sources (i.e.,
EGU sources, non-EGU point sources, non-point sources (area), non-road
sources, and on-road sources) for the 2011 nonattainment year and the
2017 attainment year for the Terre Haute area. SO2 emissions
within Terre Haute declined by 99.7% between the nonattainment year
(2011) and the attainment year (2017) resulting in attainment of the
2010 SO2 NAAQS.

  Table 2--Comparison of 2011 (Nonattainment Year) and 2017 (Attainment Year) SO2 Emissions, All Sources, Terre
                                                 Haute, Indiana
                                                 [Tons per year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    2011             2017            Change          % Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2.........................................          56,238              191          -56,046            -99.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As indicated above, the seven facilities identified in the
attainment plan have reduced their emissions from the 2011
nonattainment year to the 2017 attainment year. Table 3, below, shows
the reductions that took place from 2011 to 2017.

     Table 3--Emission Reduction Comparison of 2011 (Nonattainment Year) and 2017 (Attainment Year) for SO2
                                         Emissions, Terre Haute, Indiana
                                                 [Tons per year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Type of      Effective date  2011 Emissions  2017 Emissions
        Affected source             reduction      of reduction        (tpy)           (tpy)       Change (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duke Energy--Wabash River.....  Facility                    2016          55,343               0         -55,343
                                 Retirement.

Wabash Valley PA--Wabash River  Operational               1/1/17             267              <1            -266
 CC Plant.                       Limits.
sgSolutions...................  Operational               1/1/17              50               0             -50
                                 Limits.
Sony DADC.....................  Fuel Switch               1/1/17             168              18            -150
                                 (coal to
                                 natural gas).
Taghleef Industires...........  Unit Retirement           1/1/17             238              <1            -237
                                 & Fuel Switch
                                 (coal to
                                 natural gas).
Terre Haute Regional Hospital.  None--Existing            1/1/17              49              49               0
                                 Operational
                                 Limits.
Terre Haute Union Hospital....  None--Existing            1/1/17             123             123               0
                                 Operational
                                 Limits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA agrees that the improvement in air quality in the nonattainment
area is due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions, as
described more fully in EPA's March 22, 2019 approval of Indiana's
attainment demonstration [84 FR 10692]. In preparing its attainment
plan, Indiana adopted revisions to the previously approved
SO2 regulations at 326 IAC 7. These rule revisions were
adopted by the Indiana Environmental Rules Board following established,
appropriate public review procedures. In addition, the rule revisions
provide unambiguous, permanent emission limits, expressed in lbs/hour
of allowable SO2 emissions, that, if exceeded by a source,
would be clear grounds for an enforcement action.
    Revised limits for the seven facilities identified above are
codified in 326 IAC 7, titled ``Sulfur Dioxide Rules.'' These are:
``Compliance date'' (326 IAC 7-1.1-3, which contains a compliance date
of January 1, 2017), ``Reporting requirements; methods to determine
compliance'' (7-2-1), ``Vigo County sulfur dioxide emission
limitations'' (7-4-3.1). The rules also include associated monitoring,
testing, and recordkeeping and reporting requirements. For example,
continuous emission monitoring will be conducted for assessing
compliance with the 30-day average limits. Specifically, 326 IAC 7-1-
10.1 is being replaced by 326 IAC 7-4-3.1 for Vigo County. EPA finds
these limits to be enforceable. An additional summary of the limits is
provided in EPA's March 22, 2019 approval of Indiana's attainment
demonstration (84 FR 10692). The attainment plan also satisfies
requirements for emission inventories, RACT/RACM, RFP, and contingency
measures. Additionally, Indiana has previously addressed requirements
regarding nonattainment area NSR rules. Therefore, EPA has determined
that Indiana's SO2 attainment plan meet the applicable
requirements of CAA sections 110, 172, 191, and 192.

C. Requirements for the Area Under Section 110 and Part D

    As a criterion for redesignation of an area from nonattainment to
attainment of a NAAQS, the CAA requires EPA to determine that the state
has met all applicable requirements under section 110 and part D of
title I of the CAA (see section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the CAA). Indiana's
submission meets section 110 and part D requirements. EPA approved
Indiana's infrastructure SIP for SO2 on August 3, 2015 (80
FR 48733). In this infrastructure SIP approval, EPA determined that
Indiana's SIP meets the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) and contains the basic program elements, such as an active
enforcement program and permitting program.
    With the redesignation request of October 24, 2018, Indiana
submitted information addressing the SIP requirements under section 172
and part D. Indiana submitted an attainment inventory of the
SO2 emissions from sources in the nonattainment area on
October 2, 2015. Indiana chose 2011 for its base year emissions
inventory, as comprehensive emissions data was available and updated
that year, which satisfies the 172(c)(3) requirements. The seven
facilities identified in the previous section were the main sources in
the nonattainment area.
    Table 4 compares SO2 emissions for all sources for the
2017 attainment year and the 2030 maintenance year for Terre Haute,
Indiana. SO2 emissions within the Terre Haute area are
projected to decline by 71% between 2017 and 2030, primarily due to
facility and unit retirement, fuel switching (coal to natural gas), and
operational limits (SIP approved emission limits based on 1-hour
SO2 rates in pounds per hour identified for each facility in
326 IAC 7-4-3.1). The decrease in emissions shown between the
attainment year (2017) and the maintenance year (2030) in Table 3
illustrates that continued maintenance of the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS is expected.

   Table 4--Comparison of 2017 (Attainment Year) and 2030 (Maintenance Year) SO2 Emissions, All Sources, Terre
                                                 Haute, Indiana
                                                 [Tons per year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    2017             2030            Change          % Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2.........................................           9,231            2,662           -6,569              -71
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 172(c)(1) requires nonattainment area SIPs to provide for
the implementation of all reasonably available control measures (RACM)
as expeditiously as practicable and to provide for attainment of the
NAAQS. EPA's longstanding interpretation of the nonattainment planning
requirements of section 172 is that once an area is attaining the
NAAQS, those requirements are not applicable for purposes of CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and therefore need not be approved into the
SIP before EPA can redesignate the area. In the 1992 General Preamble
for

Implementation of Title I, EPA set forth its interpretation of
applicable requirements for purposes of evaluating redesignation
requests when an area is attaining a standard. See 57 FR 13498, 13564
(April 16, 1992). EPA noted that the requirements for reasonable
further progress (RFP) and other measures designed to provide for
attainment do not apply in evaluating redesignation requests because
those nonattainment planning requirements ``have no meaning'' for an
area that has already attained the standard. EPA's understanding of
section 172 also forms the basis of its Clean Data Policy, which was
articulated with regard to SO2 in the April 2014 ``Guidance
for 1-Hour SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP Submissions,'' and
suspends a State's obligation to submit most of the attainment planning
requirements that would otherwise apply, including an attainment
demonstration and planning SIPs to provide for RFP, RACM, and
contingency measures under section 172(c)(9). Courts have upheld EPA's
interpretation of section 172(c)(1) for ``reasonably available''
control measures and control technology as meaning only those controls
that advance attainment, which precludes the need to require additional
measures where an area is already attaining. NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d
1245, 1252 (D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162
(D.C. Cir. 2002); Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d 735, 744 (5th Cir.
2002); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004).\2\ Therefore,
because the Terre Haute nonattainment area has attained the
SO2 standard, no additional measures are needed to provide
for attainment, and section 172(c)(1) requirements for an attainment
demonstration and RACM are not part of the ``applicable implementation
plan'' required to have been approved prior to redesignation per CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). EPA believes that Indiana has satisfied the
reasonably available control measures/reasonably available control
techniques (RACM/RACT) requirement for this area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Although the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has
issued a contrary opinion in the context of redesignations for ozone
and PM2.5, EPA believes that these opinions, interpreting
the applicability of the ozone and PM2.5 RACM/RACT
requirements for redesignations for those pollutants, do not address
the applicability of the RACM/RACT requirement for SO2.
See Sierra Club v. EPA, 793 F.3d 656 (6th Cir. 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The other section 172 requirements that are designed to help an
area achieve attainment are the section 172(c)(2) requirement that
nonattainment plans contain provisions promoting RFP, the requirement
to submit the section 172(c)(9) contingency measures, and the section
172(c)(6) requirement for the SIP to contain control measures necessary
to provide for attainment of the NAAQS. These are also not required to
be approved as part of the ``applicable implementation plan'' for
purposes of satisfying CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
    Section 172(c)(4) requires the identification and quantification of
allowable emissions for major new and modified stationary sources to be
allowed in an area, and section 172(c)(5) requires source permits for
the construction and operation of new and modified major stationary
sources anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA has determined that,
since Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements will
apply after redesignation, areas being redesignated need not comply
with the requirement that a New Source Review (NSR) program be approved
prior to redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance
of the NAAQS without part D NSR. A more detailed rationale for this
view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled
``Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.'' Indiana has demonstrated that the Terre
Haute nonattainment area will be able to maintain the 2010
SO2 NAAQS without part D NSR in effect, and therefore
Indiana does not need to have a fully approved part D NSR program prior
to approval of the redesignation request. Indiana's PSD program will
become effective in the nonattainment area upon redesignation to
attainment.
    Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable
provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted above, EPA believes that the
Indiana SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) applicable for
purposes of redesignation.
    Section 176(c) of the CAA requires States to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that federally supported or funded projects
conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The
requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation plans,
programs, and projects that are developed, funded, or approved under
title 23 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act
(transportation conformity) as well as to all other federally supported
or funded projects (general conformity). State transportation
conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement, and enforceability
that EPA promulgated pursuant to its authority under the CAA. On June
4, 2010, Indiana submitted documentation establishing transportation
conformity procedures in its SIP. EPA approved these procedures on
August 17, 2010 (75 FR 50708). Moreover, EPA interprets the conformity
SIP requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating a
redesignation request under section 107(d) because, like other
requirements listed above, State conformity rules are still required
after redesignation and Federal conformity rules apply where State
rules have not been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir.
2001) (upholding this interpretation); see also 60 FR 62748 (December
7, 1995) (redesignation of Tampa, Florida).
    As discussed above, EPA is proposing to find that Indiana has
satisfied all applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation of
the Terre Haute nonattainment area under section 110 and part D of
title I of the CAA.

D. Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k)

    As a criterion for redesignation of an area from nonattainment to
attainment of a NAAQS, the CAA requires that the state has a fully
approved SIP under section 110(k) of the CAA (see section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the CAA). SIPs must be fully approved only with
respect to currently applicable requirements of the CAA. EPA has
determined that Indiana has a fully approved SIP under section 110(k).
As discussed above in section II.C., Indiana has submitted, and EPA has
approved all applicable requirements under section 110 and part D of
title I of the CAA. Indiana has implemented its SO2 SIP
regulations at 326 IAC 7-4-3, and Indiana maintains an active
enforcement program to ensure ongoing compliance. Indiana's new source
review/prevention of significant deterioration program will address
emissions from new sources. Indiana's current SO2 SIP rule
for Vigo County, which contains the Terre Haute SO2 area, is
codified at 326 IAC 7-4-3 which was approved into the SIP on March 22,
2019 (84 FR 10692).

E. Maintenance Plan

    CAA section 175A sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. Under
section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment of the
applicable NAAQS for at least ten years after the nonattainment area is
redesignated to attainment. Eight years after the redesignation, the
state must submit a revised maintenance plan

demonstrating that attainment will continue to be maintained for the
ten years following the initial ten year period. To address the
possibility of future 2010 SO2 NAAQS violations, the
maintenance plan must contain contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to assure prompt correction of any future 2010 SO2
NAAQS violations. Specifically, the maintenance plan should address
five requirements: The attainment emissions inventory, maintenance
demonstration, monitoring, verification of continued attainment, and a
contingency plan.
    Indiana's October 24, 2018 redesignation request contains its
maintenance plan, which Indiana has committed to review eight years
after redesignation. Indiana submitted an attainment emission inventory
which addresses current emissions and projections of future emissions
for point, area, and mobile sources. Indiana has demonstrated that the
area is attaining and is expected to maintain the SO2 NAAQS.
Indiana has committed to continue monitoring at its monitoring sites in
accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR part 58. These data will be
used to verify continued attainment. Indiana has the authority to
adopt, implement and enforce any subsequent emissions control measures
deemed necessary to correct any future SO2 violations.
Regarding contingency measures to implement in the case of a future
violation of the 2010 SO2 standard, Indiana provided a list
of five potential measures for the sources within the nonattainment
area, including requiring: Alternative fuel, SO2 emissions
add-on control technologies for existing emission units, reduced
operating hours, SO2 emission offsets for new and modified
major sources and SO2 emission offsets for new and modified
minor sources.
    Indiana commits to study SO2 emission trends and
identify areas of concern if the annual average 99th percentile maximum
daily 1-hour SO2 concentration of 79 ppb or greater occurs
in a single year, or if a 2-year average of 76 ppb or greater occurs in
the maintenance area. Indiana will adopt and implement corrective
actions as necessary to address such trends of increasing emissions or
ambient impacts. The public will have the opportunity to participate in
the contingency measure implementation process. EPA proposes to find
that Indiana's maintenance plan adequately addresses the five basic
components necessary to maintain the SO2 standard in the
Terre Haute nonattainment area.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    As requested by Indiana on October 24, 2018, EPA is proposing to
redesignate the Terre Haute nonattainment area from nonattainment to
attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. Indiana has demonstrated
that the area is attaining the SO2 standard, and that the
improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable
measures. EPA is also proposing to approve the maintenance plan that
Indiana submitted to ensure that the area will continue to maintain the
SO2 standard.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of the maintenance plan under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the status of geographical area
and do not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources
beyond those required by state law. A redesignation to attainment does
not in and of itself impose any new requirements, but rather results in
the application of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that
have been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions
of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40
CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to
approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this 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);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the 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 and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: April 24, 2019.
Cheryl L. Newton,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2019-09111 Filed 5-2-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 139 (Wednesday, July 20, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47166-47167]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17127]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14780-000]

Energy Resources USA, Inc.; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On May 04, 2016, Energy Resources USA, Inc. filed an application
for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power
Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of a hydropower project
located at the Kentucky River Authority's Kentucky River Lock and Dam
#10, located on the Kentucky River in Clark County, Kentucky. The sole
purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit
holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A
preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any
land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters
owned by others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) The
existing 890-foot-long, 37-foot-high concrete lock and dam; (2) three
3.97-foot-high, 82-foot-long hydraulic flashboards to be installed on
the crest of the 246-foot-

long spillway; (3) a reservoir with a surface area of 573 acres and a
storage capacity of 14,020 acre-feet at a normal surface elevation of
37 feet mean sea level (msl); (4) a 770-foot-long, 300-foot-wide intake
channel with a 85-foot-long retaining wall; (5) a 98-foot-long, 115-
foot-wide powerhouse, to be built adjacent to the spillway end of the
dam, containing two generating units with a total capacity of 9
megawatts; (6) a 1000-foot-long, 220-foot-wide tailrace with a 40-foot-
long retaining wall; (7) a 4.16/69 kilo-Volt (kV) substation; and (8) a
0.15-mile-long, 69 kV transmission line. The proposed project would
have an average annual generation of 48,690 megawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Ander Gonzalez, Energy Resources USA, Inc.,
2655 Le Jeune Road, Suite 804, Coral Gables, Florida 33134, (954) 248-
8425.
    FERC Contact: Dustin Wilson<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(202) 502-
6528.
    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.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. 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 http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, 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-14780-000) in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: July 14, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-17127 Filed 7-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 23 (Tuesday, February 4, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6107-6110]
[FR Doc No: 2020-02016]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0089; Product Identifier 2019-NM-159-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for

certain The Boeing Company Model 737-700, -800, and -900ER series
airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of unshimmed gaps
at a certain inner chord. This proposed AD would require a general
visual inspection for repairs of a certain inner chord, a detailed
inspection for unshimmed gaps of the frame inner chord, and applicable
on-condition actions. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by March 20,
2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this NPRM, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services (C&DS),
2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-5600;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may
view this referenced service information at the FAA, Transport
Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information
on the availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It
is also available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0089.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0089; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Rutar, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2020-0089;
Product Identifier 2019-NM-159-AD'' at the beginning of your comments.
The FAA specifically invites comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. The FAA will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
NPRM because of those comments.
    The FAA will post all comments received, without change, to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide.
The FAA will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The FAA has received a report of unshimmed gaps found during
production at the station (STA) 727 frame inner chord common to the
stringer (S) 18A web on multiple airplanes, on both the left and right
sides of the fuselage. Airplanes that were found to have gaps in
production were corrected prior to delivery; however, a quality
investigation determined that certain airplanes previously delivered
might have gaps. These gaps could initiate early cracking in fatigue
critical baseline structure (FCBS). Such cracking, if not addressed,
may result in the inability of a principal structural element (PSE) to
sustain limit load and adversely affect the structural integrity of the
airplane.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1385 RB,
dated August 16, 2019. This service information describes procedures
for a general visual inspection for repairs of the STA 727 frame inner
chord at S-18A, a detailed inspection for unshimmed gaps of the frame
inner chord at S-18A, and applicable on-condition actions including an
initial high frequency eddy current inspection for cracking of the
frame inner chord at S-18A, repair, shim installation between the frame
inner chord and S-18A, and repetitive high frequency eddy current
inspections for cracking of the frame inner chord at S-18A.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

FAA's Determination

    The FAA is proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions
identified in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1385 RB, dated
August 16, 2019, described previously, except for any differences
identified as exceptions in the regulatory text of this proposed AD.
    For information on the procedures and compliance times, see this
service information at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2020-0089.

Explanation of Requirements Bulletin

    The FAA worked in conjunction with industry, under the
Airworthiness Directive Implementation Aviation Rulemaking Committee
(AD ARC), to enhance the AD system. One enhancement is a process for
annotating which steps in the service information are ``required for
compliance'' (RC) with an AD. Boeing has implemented this RC concept
into Boeing service bulletins.
    In an effort to further improve the quality of ADs and AD-related
Boeing service information, a joint process improvement initiative was
worked between the FAA and Boeing. The initiative resulted in the
development of a new process in which the service information more
clearly identifies the actions needed to address the unsafe condition
in the ``Accomplishment Instructions.'' The new process results in a
Boeing Requirements Bulletin, which contains only the actions needed to
address the unsafe condition (i.e., only the RC actions).

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this proposed AD affects 56 airplanes of
U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this proposed AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per         Cost on U.S.
              Action                      Labor cost           Parts cost        product          operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection for repairs...........  3 work-hours x $85 per                $0            $255  $14,280.
                                    hour = $255.
Detailed inspection..............  1 work-hour x $85 per                  0              85  Up to $4,760.
                                    hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required. The FAA has no way of
determining the number of aircraft that might need these on-condition
actions:

                                     Estimated Costs of On-Condition Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HFEC inspection............................  Up to 3 work-hours x $85 per hour =              $0            $255
                                              $255.
Shim installation..........................  2 work-hours x $85 per hour = $170.               0             170
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the
agency to provide cost estimates for the on-condition alternative
inspections and certain repair and on-condition actions specified in
this proposed AD.
    According to the manufacturer, some or all of the costs of this
proposed AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost
impact on affected individuals. The FAA does not control warranty
coverage for affected individuals. As a result, the FAA has included
all known costs in the cost estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    The FAA has 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) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2020-0089; Product Identifier
2019-NM-159-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments by March 20, 2020.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to The Boeing Company Model 737-700, -800, and -
900ER series airplanes, certificated in any category, as identified
in Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1385 RB, dated August
16, 2019.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of unshimmed gaps at the
station (STA) 727 frame inner chord common to the stringer (S) 18A
web. The FAA is issuing this AD to address such gaps, which may
initiate early cracking in fatigue critical baseline structure
(FCBS) and result in the inability of a principal structural element
(PSE) to sustain limit load and adversely affect the structural
integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    Except as specified by paragraph (h) of this AD: At the
applicable times specified in the ``Compliance'' paragraph of Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1385 RB, dated August 16, 2019,
do all applicable actions identified in, and in accordance with, the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin
737-53A1385 RB, dated August 16, 2019.

    Note 1 to paragraph (g): Guidance for accomplishing the actions
required by this AD can be found in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
737-53A1385, dated August 16, 2019, which is referred to in Boeing
Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1385 RB, dated August 16, 2019.

(h) Exceptions to Service Information Specifications

    (1) For purposes of determining compliance with the requirements
of this AD: Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1385 RB,
dated August 16, 2019, uses the phrase ``the original issue date of
the Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1385 RB'' or ``the original issue
date of Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1385 RB,'' this AD requires

using ``the effective date of this AD,'' except where Boeing Alert
Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1385 RB, dated August 16, 2019, uses
the phrase ``the original issue date of Requirements Bulletin 737-
53A1385 RB'' in a note or flag note.
    (2) Where Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1385 RB,
dated August 16, 2019, specifies contacting Boeing for repair
instructions, alternative inspections, and applicable on-condition
actions: This AD requires accomplishing those actions using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(i) of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle ACO Branch, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request
to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District
Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the
manager of the certification office, send it to the attention of the
person identified in paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. Information may be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair, modification, or alteration required by this AD
if it is approved by The Boeing Company Organization Designation
Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO Branch, FAA, to make those findings. To be approved, the repair
method, modification deviation, or alteration deviation must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must
specifically refer to this AD.

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Greg Rutar,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, FAA, Seattle ACO Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA 98198; phone and fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data Services
(C&DS), 2600 Westminster Blvd., MC 110-SK57, Seal Beach, CA 90740-
5600; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Standards Branch, 2200 South 216th
St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued on January 28, 2020.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
 Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-02016 Filed 2-3-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61345-61348]
[DOCID:fr05oc10-6]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0691; Directorate Identifier 2010-CE-027-AD;
Amendment 39-16459; AD 2010-20-24]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Eclipse Aerospace, Inc. Model EA500
Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This AD requires incorporating changes to the
electronic flight information system and the airplane flight manuals.
This AD was prompted by reports of uncommanded changes to the
communications radio frequency, altitude preselect, and/or transponder
codes. We are issuing this AD to correct faulty integration of hardware
and software, which could result in unannunciated, uncommanded changes
in communications radio frequency, transponder codes, and altitude
preselect settings. These uncommanded changes could result in loss of
communication with air traffic control due to improper communications
frequency, autopilot level off at the incorrect altitude, or air
traffic control loss of proper tracking of the aircraft.

DATES: This AD is effective November 9, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of November 9,
2010.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Eclipse Aerospace Incorporated, 2503 Clark Carr Loop, SE., Albuquerque,
New Mexico 87106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; http://
www.eclipseaerospace.net. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust,
Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Kinney, Aerospace Engineer, Ft.
Worth Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, Texas 76137; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that would apply to
the specified products. That NPRM published in the Federal Register on
July 9, 2010 (75 FR 39472). That NPRM proposed to require incorporating
changes to the electronic flight information system and the airplane
flight manual.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comments received on the proposal
and the FAA's response to each comment.

Request To Withdraw the NPRM and Issue a Special Airworthiness
Information Bulletin (SAIB)

    Chris Jackman, Eclipse Aerospace Incorporated, proposed the
withdrawal of the NPRM and requested the FAA to issue an SAIB instead.
    The commenter reasoned that the majority of the affected airplanes
have already incorporated the corrective action, and the owners/
operators only need to send confirmation of their taking corrective
action. The commenter also states that an SAIB would be the most
effective means for operators to become aware of the unsafe condition
and means to communicate compliance with the service information.
    The FAA disagrees with the comment. The Airworthiness Directives
Manual, FAA-IR-M-8040.1C, dated May 17, 2010, prohibits the FAA from
accepting assurance from a design approval holder that all products are
in compliance as a reason not to issue an AD action. Consequently, we
are making no change to the final rule AD action.

Request To Correct the Applicability Section

    Chris Jackman requested a correction to the Applicability section,
paragraph (c)(2) of the proposed AD action. He explained that the
applicability in the NPRM is incorrect and should read as follows:

    SNs 000039 through 000104, 000113 through 000115, 000120, and
000123 through 000124, that incorporate Avionics Upgrade to AVIO NG
Configuration for ETT Configured Aircraft per any revision level of
Eclipse SB 500-99-002.

    The FAA agrees with the commenter's correction. This error was
corrected in the NPRM; correction, published in the Federal Register on
August 2, 2010 (75 FR 45075). The final rule AD action incorporates
that correction.

Request To Add a Reference to Eclipse Aviation Recommended Service
Bulletin SB 500-99-005, REV B, dated January 22, 2010

    Chris Jackman commented that Eclipse Aviation Recommended Service
Bulletin SB 500-99-005, REV B, dated January 22, 2010, also includes
procedures for compliance with this AD and requested adding a reference
to that service bulletin in addition to Eclipse Aviation Recommended
Service Bulletin SB 500-99-005, REV A, dated February 16, 2009.
    The FAA agrees with the commenter. We are adding a reference to
Eclipse Aviation Recommended Service Bulletin SB 500-99-005, REV B,
dated January 22, 2010, to the final rule AD action.

Request To Change the Contact Information for Eclipse Aerospace
Incorporated

    Chris Jackman stated the contact for service information has
changed. The current name is Eclipse Aerospace Incorporated instead of
Eclipse Aviation Corporation.
    The FAA agrees with the commenter. We changed the contact
information in the final rule AD action.

Request To Withdraw the Proposed AD

    Gerard Wasselle stated that he and at least six other owners/pilots
who have vast experience in the Eclipse Model EA500 airplane, all agree
that the unsafe condition presented in the proposed AD occurs only in
the AVIO NG version 1.1. We infer that the commenter would like to have
the proposed AD withdrawn.
    We disagree with the commenter. The root cause investigation by
Eclipse Aerospace Incorporated discovered that this problem can and has
occurred in Innovative Solution & Support

equipment with software versions 1.0 through 1.2. This AD is not
applicable to Avidyne AVIO-equipped Model EA500 airplanes. We are not
changing the final rule AD action as a result of this comment.

Request To Withdraw the Proposed AD Because of Cost

    Gerard Wasselle stated the corrective action is cost prohibitive
for owners of an older version of AVIO to upgrade to AVIO NG since it
is more than the value of the airplane. We infer that the commenter
would like to see the proposed AD withdrawn.
    The FAA disagrees with the commenter. This AD action does not apply
to Avidyne AVIO-equipped Model EA500 airplanes. We are not changing the
final rule AD action as a result of this comment.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    We also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 168 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    Owners/operators will comply with this AD action by doing either of
the following update options. We have no way of knowing the number of
airplanes that would receive each of these upgrades.
    We estimate the following costs to do the electronic flight
instrument system 1.3 software update:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Total cost per
          Labor cost                Parts cost            airplane
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 work-hours x $85 per hour =   $600 to $1,500...  $770 to $1,670.
 $170.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

     We estimate the following costs to do the avionics upgrade to AVIO
NG + 1.5 configuration:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Total cost
                  Labor cost                     Parts cost      per
                                                               airplane
------------------------------------------------------------------------
198 work-hours x $85 per hour = $16,830.......     $233,120     $249,950
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    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 that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

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 airworthiness
directive (AD):

2010-20-24 Eclipse Aerospace, Inc.: Amendment 39-16459; Docket No.
FAA-2010-0691; Directorate Identifier 2010-CE-027-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD is effective November 9, 2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Model EA500 airplanes with the following
serial numbers (SNs) that are certificated in any category:
    (1) SNs 000105 through 000112, 000116 through 000119, 000121
through 000122, and 000125 through 000260;
    (2) SNs 000039 through 000104, 000113 through 000115, 000120,
and 000123 through 000124, that incorporate Avionics Upgrade to AVIO
NG Configuration for ETT Configured Aircraft per any revision level
of Eclipse SB 500-99-002; and
    (3) SNs 000001 through 000038, that incorporate Performance
Enhancement & Drag Reduction Modification per any revision level of
Eclipse SB 500-99-001 and Avionics Upgrade to AVIO NG Configuration
for ETT Configured Aircraft per any revision level of Eclipse SB
500-99-002.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 23:
Communications.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from reports of uncommanded changes to the
communications radio frequency, altitude preselect, and/or
transponder codes. We are issuing this AD to correct faulty
integration of hardware and software, which could result in
unannunciated, uncommanded changes in communications radio
frequency, transponder codes, and altitude preselect settings. These
uncommanded changes could result in loss of communication with air
traffic control due to improper communications frequency, autopilot
level off at the incorrect altitude, or air traffic control loss of
proper tracking of the aircraft.

Compliance

    (f) To address this problem, you must do the following, unless
already done:

                                                      Table 1--Actions, Compliance, and Procedures
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Actions (software updates and AFM revisions)                           Compliance                                    Procedures
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Incorporate one of the following set of software upgrades  Incorporate within the next 6 months after    Follow, as appropriate, Eclipse Aviation
 and AFM revisions:                                             November 9, 2010 (the effective date of       Required Service Bulletin SB 500[dash]31-
(i) Electronic flight instrument system (EFIS) 1.3 software     this AD).                                     015, REV D, dated January 14, 2009; or
 update and one of the following airplane flight manual                                                       Eclipse Aviation Recommended Service
 revisions:                                                                                Bulletin SB 500-99-005, REV A, dated
(A) Temporary Revision (TR) 010, Airplane Flight Manual part                                                  February 16, 2009; or Eclipse Aviation
 number (P/N) 06-122204 Before 3-45, Revision 01 and TR 009,                                                  Recommended Service Bulletin SB 500-99-
 Quick Reference Handbook P/N 06-122205, Revision 01; or                                                      005, REV B, dated January 22, 2010.
(B) TR 010A, Airplane Flight Manual P/N 06-122204 Before 3-
 51, Revision 02 and TR 009A, Quick Reference Handbook P/N 06-
 122205, Revision 02; or
(C) Airplane Flight Manual P/N 06-122204 Revision 3, dated
 February 3, 2010, and Quick Reference Handbook P/N 06-
 122205, Revision 03.
(ii) Avionics upgrade to AVIO NG + 1.5 Configuration and one
 of the following airplane flight manual revisions:
(A) Aircraft Flight Manual, P/N 06-122204, Revision 2, dated
 November 7, 2008, or
(B) AVIO NG + 1.5 configuration and Aircraft Flight Manual, P/
 N 06-122204, Revision 3, dated February 10, 2010.
(2) Send the completed service bulletin compliance record      Within 30 days after you incorporate the      Not Applicable.
 required by paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this AD or paragraph        revisions required by paragraph (f)(1)(i)
 (f)(1)(ii) of this AD to the address identified in paragraph   of this AD or paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this
 (g) of this AD. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)      AD or within 30 days after November 9, 2010
 approved the information collection requirements contained     (the effective date of this AD), whichever
 in this regulation under the provisions of the Paperwork       occurs later.
 Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and assigned
 OMB Control Number 2120-0056.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (g) The Manager, Fort Worth Airplane Certification Office (ACO),
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: Eric Kinney, Fort Worth ACO, Aerospace Engineer, 2601 Meacham
Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
(817) 222-5960. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to
which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector
(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking
a PI, your local FSDO.

Related Information

    (h) For more information about this AD, contact Eric Kinney,
Aerospace Engineer, Fort Worth ACO, FAA, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort
Worth, Texas 76137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Material Incorporated by Reference

    (i) You must use the service information contained in Table 2 of
this AD 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 the service information contained in
Table 2 of this AD under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

                                   Table 2--Material Incorporated By Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Document                              Revision                                Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Eclipse Aviation Required         REV D...............................  January 14, 2009.
 Service Bulletin SB 500[dash]31-015.
(ii) Eclipse Aviation Recommended     REV B...............................  January 22, 2010.
 Service Bulletin SB 500-99-005.
(iii) Eclipse Aviation Recommended    REV A...............................  February 16, 2009.
 Service Bulletin SB 500-99-005.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Eclipse Aerospace Incorporated, 2503 Clark Carr Loop, SE.,
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; http://
www.eclipseaerospace.net.
    (3) You may review copies of the referenced service information
at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106. 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 an
NARA facility, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_
locations.html.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on September 24, 2010.
Patrick R. Mullen,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-24611 Filed 10-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 109 (Monday, June 8, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 32431]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13892]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. FAA-2015-34]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received; Those
Amazing Performers LLC DBA Team AeroDynamix

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Title 14 of the Code of Federal
Regulations. The purpose of this notice is to improve the public's
awareness of, and participation in, the FAA's exemption process.
Neither publication of this notice nor the inclusion or omission of
information in the summary is intended to affect the legal status of
the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before June 29, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2015-0798
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brent Hart<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of
Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 1, 2015.
Brenda D. Courtney,
Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2015-0798.
    Petitioner: Those Amazing Performers LLC DBA Team AeroDynamix.
    Section(s) of 14 CFR Affected: Sec.  91.319(c).
    Description of Relief Sought: Those Amazing Performers LLC DBA Team
AeroDynamix seeks limited relief from the requirements of Sec.
91.319(c) to permit over flights of stadiums, sporting events, and
other large public events in certain aircraft certified in the
experimental, amateur built category aircraft.

[FR Doc. 2015-13892 Filed 6-5-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 153 (Friday, August 7, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 47956]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17299]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. AD20-24-000, ER02-2001-000]

Electric Quarterly Report Users Group Meeting; Electric Quarterly
Reports; Notice of Electric Quarterly Report Users Group Meeting

    Take notice \1\ that on September 23, 2020, staff of the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) will convene an Electric
Quarterly Report (EQR) User Group meeting that will be webcast
electronically. A supplemental notice will be issued prior to the
meeting with further details regarding the agenda, meeting registration
information, and electronic log in information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 2.1 (2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This meeting provides a forum for dialogue between Commission staff
and EQR users to discuss potential improvements to the EQR program and
the EQR filing process. Prior to the meeting, staff would like input on
discussion topics. Individuals may suggest agenda topics for
consideration by emailing<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Please note that matters pending before the Commission and subject
to ex parte limitations cannot be discussed at this meeting.
    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please
send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a FAX to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.
    For more information about the EQR Users Group meeting, please
contact Jeff Sanders of the Commission's Office of Enforcement at (202)
502-6455, or send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Additional
information will also be provided on the EQR webpage.

    Dated: August 3, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-17299 Filed 8-6-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P