From:
Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Monday, March 1, 2021 12:46 PM
To:
David Ailor<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc:
Raymond, Gabrielle<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
coke model files have gone to EPA division QA

Hello David and Katie. Here are the compiled modeling files that I sent to my division for QA. It may take a couple of weeks (or more) for this review. We use an outside contractor to check these files, mostly for proper coding and mathematical inconsistencies.  At that point, if no errors or after errors are corrected, the files go on to the risk modelers who check for consistencies in modeling parameters and locations. At that point, if no errors or after correction of errors, we will post the files to the public NESHAP website while the risk modeling is being done. I will keep you both posted on all steps in the process.

Thanks to you and your staff and collaborators for the help working with us to get the data in best condition possible. It's been a long, sometimes hard journey to this point, so we should all congratulate ourselves!

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.

<< CokeOven_SubpartCCCCC_NonCategory_RTR_ModFile_20210301.xlsx >>
<< CokeOven_SubpartCCCCC_Category_RTR_ModFile_20210301.xlsx >>


Year State Species Metric TonsPounds $ 1980 Maryland CROAKER 3.2 7,100 3,474 1980 Virginia CROAKER 322.8 711,600 212,490 1981 Maryland CROAKER 1 2,100 612 1981 Virginia CROAKER 195 429,800 124,866 1982 Maryland CROAKER 3.2 7,000 1,191 1982 Virginia CROAKER 54.1 119,300 49,441 1983 Maryland CROAKER 0.2 500 214 1983 Virginia CROAKER 68.2 150,400 45,353 1984 Maryland CROAKER 12.3 27,100 12,004 1984 Virginia CROAKER 370.9 817,700 267,690 1985 Maryland CROAKER 4.3 9,500 3,818 1985 Virginia CROAKER 985.1 2,171,821 554,191 1986 Maryland CROAKER 62.4 137,500 50,422 1986 Virginia CROAKER 1,073.70 2,367,000 576,640 1987 Maryland CROAKER 54.1 119,300 40,552 1987 Virginia CROAKER 1,233.60 2,719,500 1,060,709 1988 Maryland CROAKER 44.8 98,700 42,482 1988 Virginia CROAKER 793.4 1,749,200 899,327 1989 Maryland CROAKER 40.6 89,500 52,379 1989 Virginia CROAKER 429.7 947,300 533,036 1990 Maryland CROAKER 1.6 3,584 2,667 1990 Virginia CROAKER 89.9 198,195 110,740 1991 Maryland CROAKER 2.8 6,183 5,141 1991 Virginia CROAKER 74.4 164,126 90,735 1992 Maryland CROAKER 4.8 10,685 5,722 1992 Virginia CROAKER 607.5 1,339,388 428,793 1993 Maryland CROAKER 71.7 158,062 80,800 1993 Virginia CROAKER 2,388.20 5,264,974 1,846,467 1994 Maryland CROAKER 99.2 218,744 129,508 1994 Virginia CROAKER 2,618.80 5,773,430 2,012,748 1995 Maryland CROAKER 249.3 549,716 288,575 1995 Virginia CROAKER 3,171.10 6,991,044 2,527,690 1996 Maryland CROAKER 367.6 810,435 291,324 1996 Virginia CROAKER 4,283.30 9,442,959 3,345,400 1997 Maryland CROAKER 660.3 1,455,707 497,880 1997 Virginia CROAKER 5,801.90 ######## 3,567,206 1998 Maryland CROAKER 624 1,375,646 453,055 1998 Virginia CROAKER 5,446.30 ######## 4,161,655 1999 Maryland CROAKER 718.7 1,584,412 482,034 1999 Virginia CROAKER 5,828.70 ######## 3,499,416 2000 Maryland CROAKER 681.1 1,501,655 569,224 2000 Virginia CROAKER 5,846.60 ######## 5,598,277 2001 Maryland CROAKER 1,013.00 2,233,160 675,770 2001 Virginia CROAKER 5,864.60 ######## 3,126,152 2002 Maryland CROAKER 686.3 1,513,025 511,733 2002 Virginia CROAKER 5,646.30 ######## 3,814,795 2003 Maryland CROAKER 694.9 1,532,038 576,227 2003 Virginia CROAKER 4,960.70 ######## 2,822,496


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 143 (Wednesday, July 25, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 35282]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15841]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4377-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001]

Texas; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Texas (FEMA-4377-DR), dated July 6, 2018, and
related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued July 6, 2018.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated July 6, 2018, the President issued a major disaster declaration
under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford
Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Texas resulting from severe storms and flooding beginning on June
19, 2018, and continuing, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to
warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.
(the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such a major
disaster exists in the State of Texas.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Individual Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State.
Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Hazard Mitigation and Other Needs Assistance will be limited to 75
percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The time period prescribed for the implementation of section
310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public
Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed
six months after the date of this declaration.
    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Jerry S. Thomas, of FEMA is
appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major
disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Texas have been designated as
adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Cameron and Hidalgo Counties for Individual Assistance.
    All areas within the State of Texas are eligible for assistance
under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

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

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2018-15841 Filed 7-24-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: June 6, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 110)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 32236-32237]
[DOCID:fr06jn08-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0450]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Sacramento River, Sacramento, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
Tower Drawbridge across the Sacramento River, mile 59.0, at Sacramento,
California. The deviation is necessary to allow the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to conduct major roadwork on
Interstate 5 through downtown Sacramento. This deviation allows the
drawspan to remain in the

closed-to-navigation position during rush hour time periods.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 6 a.m. on June 2, 2008 through
8 p.m. on July 14, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2008-0450 and are available online
at http://www.regulations.gov. They are also available for inspection
or copying at two locations: the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, and
Commander (dpw), Eleventh Coast Guard District, Building 50-2, Coast
Guard Island, Alameda, CA 94501-5100, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David H. Sulouff, Chief, Bridge
Section, Eleventh Coast Guard District, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Caltrans requested a temporary change to the
operation of the Tower Drawbridge, mile 59.0, across the Sacramento
River, at Sacramento, California. The Tower Drawbridge provides a
vertical clearance of 30 feet above Mean High Water in the closed-to-
navigation position. The drawspan opens on signal from May 1 through
October 31 from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. and from November 1 through April 30
from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. At all other times the drawspan shall open on
signal if at least four hours notice is given, as required by 33 CFR
117.189. Navigation on the waterway is commercial and recreational. The
drawspan will be secured in the closed-to-navigation position from 6
a.m. to 10 a.m. and from 3 p.m. to 8 p.m. June 2, 2008 through June 6,
2008; June 16, 2008 through June 20, 2008; June 27, 2008; June 30, 2008
through July 2, 2008; July 9, 2008 through July 11, 2008; and July 14,
2008. Special provisions have been made to accommodate commercial
waterway traffic. The drawspan shall open for vessels at 6 p.m. on each
Friday during the deviation period and at 6 p.m. on June 3, 2008 and
June 5, 2008.
    These closures will allow an unimpeded alternate route for rush
hour commuter traffic, across the Tower Drawbridge, during major
construction work on Interstate 5 through downtown Sacramento. This
temporary deviation has been coordinated with waterway users.
Adjustments to the schedule were made to minimize impacts to commercial
waterway traffic. There is no anticipated levee maintenance during this
deviation period. No objections to the proposed temporary deviation
were raised.
    Vessels that can transit the drawspan, while in the closed-to-
navigation position, may continue to do so at any time.
    In the event of an emergency the drawspan can be opened once road
traffic is cleared.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: May 29, 2008.
J.E. Long,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. E8-12802 Filed 6-5-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58131-58132]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23089]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9730-1]

Cross-Media Electronic Reporting: Authorized Program Revision
Approval, State of Mississippi

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA's approval of the State of
Mississippi's request to revise/modify certain of its EPA-authorized
programs to allow electronic reporting.

DATES: EPA's approval is effective on September 19, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Evi Huffer, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Information, Mail Stop
2823T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, (202) 566-
1697<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Karen Seeh, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Environmental Information, Mail Stop 2823T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 13, 2005, the final Cross-Media
Electronic Reporting Rule (CROMERR) was published in the Federal
Register (70 FR 59848) and codified as part 3 of title 40 of the CFR.
CROMERR establishes electronic reporting as an acceptable regulatory
alternative to paper reporting and establishes requirements to assure
that electronic documents are as legally dependable as their paper
counterparts. Subpart D of CROMERR requires that state, tribal or local
government agencies that receive, or wish to begin receiving,
electronic reports under their EPA-authorized programs must apply to
EPA for a revision or modification of those programs and obtain EPA
approval. Subpart D provides standards for such approvals based on
consideration of the electronic document receiving systems that the
state, tribal, or local government will use to implement the electronic
reporting. Additionally, Sec.  3.1000(b) through (e) of 40 CFR part 3,
subpart D provides special procedures for program revisions and
modifications to allow electronic reporting, to be used at the option
of the State, Tribe or local government in place of procedures
available under existing program-specific authorization regulations. An
application submitted under the subpart D procedures must show that the
state, tribe or local government has sufficient legal authority to
implement the electronic reporting components of the programs covered
by the application and will use electronic document receiving systems
that meet the applicable subpart D requirements.
    On January 14, 2010, the Mississippi Department of Environmental
Quality (MDEQ) submitted an application entitled ``Regulatory Services
Portal/Hazardous Waste Biennial Reporting'' for revisions/modifications
of its EPA-authorized programs under title 40 CFR. EPA reviewed MDEQ's
request to revise/modify its EPA-authorized programs and, based on this
review, EPA determined that the application met the standards for
approval of authorized program revisions/modifications set out in 40
CFR part 3, subpart D. In accordance with 40 CFR 3.1000(d), this notice
of EPA's decision to approve Mississippi's request to revise/modify its
following EPA-authorized programs to allow electronic

reporting under 40 CFR parts 51, 61, 70, 261-262, and 264-265 is being
published in the Federal Register:
    Part 52--Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans;
    Part 61--National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
Subpart M--National Emission Standard for Asbestos;
    Part 70--State Operating Permit Programs; and
    Part 272--Approved State Hazardous Waste Management Programs.
    Specifically, EPA has approved the state's revision to its part 272
authorized program for electronic reporting of hazardous waste biennial
report information under 40 CFR parts 262.41 and 264.75, for electronic
submissions that include a handwritten signature on a separate paper
submission report instead of an electronic signature.
    MDEQ was notified of EPA's determination to approve its application
with respect to the authorized programs listed above.

    Dated: September 10, 2012.
Andrew Battin,
Director, Office of Information Collection.
[FR Doc. 2012-23089 Filed 9-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 16 (Wednesday, January 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 3760]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1414]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice Announcing Filing Priority for Preliminary Permit
Applications

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Project
                                                                  No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FFP Project 39, LLC.........................................   12925-002
Northland Power Mississippi River LLC.......................   14078-000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 17, 2012, the Commission held a drawing to determine
priority among competing preliminary permit applications with identical
filing times. In the event that the Commission concludes that none of
the applicants' plans are better adapted than the others to develop,
conserve, and utilize in the public interest the water resources of the
region at issue, the priority established by this drawing will serve as
the tiebreaker. Based on the drawing, the order of priority is as
follows:
    1. FFP Project 39, LLC; Project No. 12925-002.
    2. Northland Power Mississippi River LLC; Project No. 14078-000.

    Dated: January 18, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-1414 Filed 1-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 190 (Tuesday, October 1, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52163-52164]
[FR Doc No: 2019-21283]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2019-0167]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Implantable
Cardioverter Defibrillators

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

ACTION: Notice of applications for exemption; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from four individuals
for an exemption from the prohibition in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) against operation of a commercial motor
vehicle (CMV) by persons with a current clinical diagnosis of
myocardial infarction, angina pectoris, coronary insufficiency,
thrombosis, or any other cardiovascular disease of a variety known to
be accompanied by syncope (transient loss of consciousness), dyspnea
(shortness of breath), collapse, or congestive heart failure. If
granted, the exemptions would enable these individuals with implantable
cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) to operate CMVs in interstate
commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 31, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-2019-0167 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FMCSA-2019-0167. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for instructions on submitting comments.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (Docket No. FMCSA-2019-0167), indicate the specific section of
this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for
each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and

material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so that FMCSA can contact you if there are questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FMCSA-2019-0167. Click on the ``Comment Now!'' button and type
your comment into the text box on the following screen. Choose whether
you are submitting your comment as an individual or on behalf of a
third party and then submit.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    FMCSA will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period.

B. Viewing Documents and Comments

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FMCSA-2019-0167 and choose the document to review. If you do
not have access to the internet, you may view the docket online by
visiting the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.

C. Privacy Act

    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 www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the FMCSRs for no longer than a 5-year period if it finds such
exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to,
or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such
exemption. The statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions at
the end of the 5-year period. FMCSA grants medical exemptions from the
FMCSRs for a 2-year period to align with the maximum duration of a
driver's medical certification.
    The four individuals listed in this notice have requested an
exemption from 49 CFR 391.41(b)(4). Accordingly, the Agency will
evaluate the qualifications of each applicant to determine whether
granting the exemption will achieve the required level of safety
mandated by statute.
    The physical qualification standard found in Sec.  391.41(b)(4)
states that a person is physically qualified to drive a CMV if that
person has no current clinical diagnosis of myocardial infarction,
angina pectoris, coronary insufficiency, thrombosis, or any other
cardiovascular disease of a variety known to be accompanied by syncope,
dyspnea, collapse, or congestive cardiac failure.
    In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory
criteria\1\ to assist medical examiners in determining whether drivers
with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce. The advisory criteria states that ICDs are
disqualifying due to risk of syncope.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ These criteria may be found in 49 CFR part 391, APPENDIX A
TO PART 391--MEDICAL ADVISORY CRITERIA, section D. Cardiovascular:
Sec.  391.41(b)(4), paragraph 4, which is available on the internet
at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2015-title49-vol5/pdf/CFR-2015-title49-vol5-part391-appA.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Qualifications of Applicants

Christopher Cloud

    Mr. Cloud is a CMV driver in Georgia. An April 2019, letter from
his cardiologist states that Mr. Cloud's ICD was implanted in May of
2016, has not deployed, he denies any symptoms associated with the
device, and that his ejection fraction has now improved with low risk
of cardiovascular complications.

Joby Doucet

    Mr. Doucet is a Class A CDL holder in Louisiana. A May 15, 2019,
letter from his cardiologist states that Mr. Doucet's ICD was implanted
in September of 2017, he is on good medical therapy, and there has been
no defibrillator discharges. Mr. Doucet's cardiologist reports that he
is in a stable cardiovascular status and will have follow-up in 6
months.

Robert D. Forbes

    Mr. Forbes is a Class A CDL holder in New York State. A March 2019,
letter from Mr. Forbes' cardiologist states that his ICD was implanted
in September of 2015, has never deployed, and that he has an improved
ejection fraction.

Christopher Oakland

    Mr. Oakland is a Class A CDL holder in Rhode Island. Two separate
letters both dated June of 2019, from two of Mr. Oakland's
cardiologists state that his ICD was implanted in August of 2018, and
has never delivered therapy. His cardiologists' letters report that Mr.
Oakland is stable and has not experienced symptoms as a result of his
cardiac condition.

IV. Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA requests
public comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions
described in this notice. We will consider all comments received before
the close of business on the closing date indicated under the DATES
section of the notice.

    Issued on: September 25, 2019.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-21283 Filed 9-30-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


                 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY
                             2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE
                           ANN ARBOR, MI  48105-2498

									     OFFICE OF
									AIR AND RADIATION
July 7[th], 2020

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Calculation of Burden

FROM: 	G. Cullen Leggett, Aerospace Engineer
	Assessment and Standards Division
	Office of Transport and Air Quality
	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

TO:	Information Collection Request; Airplane Green House Gas Standards
	Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0276

This memo documents the calculation of burden for the ICR associated with the proposed Airplane GHG Standards. Data from Bureau of Labor and Statistics (BLS) on wages and the Producer Price Index (PPI) was used in these calculations. This data has been included in the attached Excel file.  The Excel file separates the calculations on different sheets.  These are described below:
 Read me  -  Overview of file
 BLS OES Report  -  Data from BLS on wages in "Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing"
 BLS PPI Inflation Calc  -  PPI data for "Aircraft Engine and Engines Parts Manufacturing" Industry from 2007-2017.   Rows 26-32 calculate inflation rate from Jan. 2015-Jan. 2017.
 Respondent Burden  -  Calculation of respondent burden to existing and new collections
 Government Burden  -  Calculation of government burden to existing and new collections
 Total Burden  -  Summary of respondent and government burden

Attachments:
Burden Calculations_NPRM_Final.xlsx


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 141 (Tuesday, July 23, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 44090]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17671]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 770

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-0380; FRL-9393-9]
RIN 2070-AJ44

Formaldehyde; Third-Party Certification Framework for the
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products; Extension of
Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a proposed rule in the Federal Register of June 10,
2013, concerning a third-party certification framework for the
formaldehyde standards for composite wood products. This document
extends the comment period from August 9, 2013 to August 26, 2013.
After receiving requests for an extension, EPA believes it is
appropriate to extend the comment period in order to give stakeholders
additional time to assess the impacts of the proposal, review technical
documents in the docket, and prepare comments.

DATES: EPA is extending the comment date for a proposed rule published
June 10, 2013 at 78 FR 34796. Comments, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-0380, must be received on
or before August 26, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions as provided under ADDRESSES
in the Federal Register document of June 10, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information contact:
Erik Winchester, National Program Chemicals Division (7404T), Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 564-6450; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document extends the public comment
period established in the Federal Register of June 10, 2013 (78 FR
34796) (FRL-9342-4). EPA is hereby extending the comment period, which
was set to end on August 9, 2013, to August 26, 2013.
    To submit comments, or access the docket, please follow the
detailed instructions as provided under ADDRESSES in the June 10, 2013,
Federal Register document. If you have questions, consult the technical
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 770

    Environmental protection, Composite wood products, Formaldehyde,
Reporting and recordkeeping, Third-party certification.

    Dated: July 17, 2013.
James Jones,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2013-17671 Filed 7-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: November 29, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 228)]
[Notices]
[Page 73104-73106]
[DOCID:fr29no10-102]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0547]

Clinical Development Programs for Sedation Products; Request for
Assistance

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is seeking information
on a variety of issues related to the clinical development and use of
sedation products in adult and pediatric age groups. FDA is inviting
any interested party, or parties, to facilitate an evaluation of
critical fundamentals of the science related to sedation products by
conducting and managing a coordination of activities that will bring
together experts in the field, including from academia, patient
organizations, and industry. The first step in this process would be
for the party or parties to plan and hold one or more public meetings
to discuss these issues. FDA intends to take into account the
information provided from these activities as we develop FDA guidance
on clinical development programs for sedation products. We intend to
submit to the docket all the information received in response to this
notice so that interested parties may be fully informed.

DATES: Submit electronic or written comments on this notice by January
28, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments on this notice to http://
www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara E. Stradley, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, rm. 3162, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-1298, FAX:301-796-9713, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Because of the need for more information on the development of
products intended to be used in humans for sedation in hospital and
outpatient settings, FDA is requesting assistance from the public in
conducting scientific analyses for the purpose of further understanding
the physiology of sedation and clinical trial design issues related to
the development of sedation products.

II. Request for Assistance

    FDA is inviting any interested group or consortium of interested
groups from academia, industry, practitioners, as well as patients and
their representatives to conduct and manage the coordination of a
critical evaluation of certain fundamentals of the science related to
sedation products. Initially, the party or parties would organize and
hold one or more public meetings or workshops to discuss relevant
questions associated with the spectrum of sedation, particularly as it
relates to procedural and intensive care unit (ICU) sedation, as well
as associated clinical trial design issues. FDA believes that a public
meeting would help solicit feedback from all parties leading to
conceptual advances and a discussion of such advances in a concept
paper. This discussion would take into account challenges involved in
assessment of sedation and emphasize the rationale for various
approaches to key clinical trial design issues involving sedation
products. The effort would ultimately lead to developing a draft
guidance that would be issued by FDA for broad public comment before
finalization, consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation
(21 CFR 10.115).

III. Suggestions

    FDA welcomes other suggestions of activities that could be
undertaken as part of this guidance development effort.

IV. Possible Questions/Issues o Be Considered

    To provide a starting point for discussion, FDA has developed a
list of some key concepts that the interested parties may want to
consider for discussion at the meeting as follows:
    1. Currently, sedation is studied primarily in the procedural and
ICU settings. Procedural sedation may involve an outpatient setting,
and may require the institution of Monitored Anesthesia Care (MAC).
There is great interest among health care providers with varied medical
backgrounds in sedation for surgical and diagnostic procedures in the
outpatient setting. What generally constitutes MAC, and what qualifies
a product for MAC? How should the need for MAC be assessed in clinical
trials involving sedation products?
    2. Assessment of procedural sedation involves conducting clinical
trials in a wide range of diagnostic and surgical procedures. What
surgical and diagnostic procedures are of particular value in assessing
the procedural sedation indication? Are there certain procedures that
should be evaluated for every product that seeks the procedural
sedation indication, or can the range of trials be governed by the
pharmacologic profile of the product? Should the scope of the sedation
guidance apply to settings other than procedural or ICU sedation?
    3. There are patient subgroups in which the use of sedation
products should be particularly evaluated. For example, pediatric and
geriatric age groups often require dose adjustment because of varying
metabolic needs and other clinical parameters. In addition, dose
adjustment may be required in patients with renal and hepatic
impairment. Are there other patient subgroups that require specific
evaluation in clinical trials involving sedation products?
    4. Sedation products usually are used as infusions that are
titrated to achieve the desired sedation effect. What are optimal trial
designs for sedation products? Should clinical trials involving
sedation products be placebo-controlled or active-controlled?
Currently, Midazolam, Propofol, Ketamine, and Dexmedetomidine are
commonly used sedation products. Of these, Midazolam is the most
commonly used active comparator in sedation product trial designs. Is
it possible to accurately predict the actual size of the treatment
effect based on use of Midazolam or other commonly used sedation
products? Although trial designs involving these products are believed
to be predictive, it may not be possible to generalize from them. If
active- and placebo-controlled product trial designs are not optimal,
what alternative designs can be used to support sedation claims? Would
dose-escalation comparative trial designs be useful in studying
sedation products?
    5. How is sedation defined and what are appropriate outcome
measures to assess sedation? At present, there is diverse opinion among
health care providers regarding the definition of sedation. For
example, is the assessment of anxiolysis and agitation a separate
entity or is it contained within the spectrum of sedation itself?
Should this depend upon the known pharmacologic profile of the product?
Currently, the primary efficacy endpoint in sedation clinical trials is
usually assessed using sedation scales. Commonly used sedation scales
include the Ramsey Sedation Scale, Richmond Agitation and Sedation
Scale, and Mean Observer's Assessment of Agitation/Sedation Scale. How
appropriate is the use of such sedation scales in clinical trials
involving sedation products? Should all sedation scales be standardized
and validated?
    6. Sedation scales are used for assessing the primary efficacy
endpoint for sedation products. What are meaningful secondary efficacy
endpoints in such trials? Are subjective and objective assessments of
memory, recall, anxiety, agitation, delirium, among others, appropriate
as efficacy endpoints? Which of these efficacy endpoints should be
considered clinically significant? If so, what outcome measures and
trial designs should be used? Specifically, how should anxiolysis and
agitation be assessed within the realm of products primarily indicated
for sedation purposes and not to treat an anxiety disorder or
agitation? Should there be different scales for assessing each
component, or can the assessment be contained within the spectrum of
sedation using an appropriate scale? Further, is an accurate assessment
of anxiolysis feasible given the multiple variables that can affect
anxiety in a procedural sedation setting that would have to be
standardized (e.g., physician and practice setting profile, pre-
procedure anticipatory patient prepping, individual thresholds for
anxiety)?
    7. ICU sedation products are often used for periods longer than 24
hours. Should an ICU sedation indication include a short-term (less
than 24 hours) and long-term (more than 24 hours) use assessment for
purposes of efficacy and safety? Long-term use may be associated with
tolerance/tachyphylaxis and a dose-related increase in adverse effects.
What should the size and duration of exposure of the safety database be
for sedation products?

V. Comments

    Interested persons should submit comments and expressions of
interest in conducting and managing a critical evaluation to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. It is no longer necessary to send two copies
of mailed comments. Identify comments with the docket number

found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday.

    Dated: November 17, 2010.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assisitant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-29927 Filed 11-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 215 (Monday, November 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68766-68767]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28669]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0771]

Draft Blueprint for Prescriber Education for Long-Acting/
Extended-Release Opioid Class-Wide Risk Evaluation and Mitigation
Strategy; Availability; Request for Comments

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of a draft document entitled ``Blueprint for Prescriber
Education for the Long-Acting/Extended-Release Opioid Class-Wide REMS''
(Blueprint). The draft Blueprint contains core messages intended for
use by continuing education (CE) providers to develop educational
materials to train prescribers of long-acting and extended-release
opioids under the required risk evaluation and mitigation strategy
(REMS) for these products (Opioid REMS). FDA seeks stakeholder input on
the document. After comments are received, FDA will revise the
Blueprint as appropriate, incorporate it into the Opioid REMS when it
is approved, and post it on FDA's Web site for use by CE providers.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
Blueprint by December 7, 2011.

ADDRESSES: See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the draft Blueprint. Submit electronic comments on the draft
Blueprint to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michie I. Hunt, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, rm. 6153, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, (301)
796-3504.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA)
gave FDA the authority to require manufacturers to develop and
implement a REMS when necessary to ensure the benefits of a drug or
biological product outweigh its risks.

A. REMS for Long-Acting and Extended-Release Opioids

    On February 6, 2009, FDA sent letters to manufacturers of certain
opioid drug products indicating that these drugs will be required to
have a REMS to ensure that the benefits of the drugs continue to
outweigh the risks.\1\ The affected opioid drugs include long-acting
and extended-release brand name and generic products and are formulated
with the active ingredients buprenorphine, fentanyl, hydromorphone,
methadone, morphine, oxycodone, oxymorphone, and tapentadol. After
sending the letters, FDA held a series of meetings with stakeholders
and convened an advisory committee to obtain input on the appropriate
elements of the Opioid REMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See the Opioid REMS Meeting Invitation Template at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/DrugSafety/InformationbyDrugClass/UCM163652.pdf and the Opioids Products Chart at http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/InformationbyDrugClass/ucm163654.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 19, 2011, in conjunction with the Office of National Drug
Control Policy (ONDCP) release of the Obama Administration's Epidemic:
Responding to America's Prescription Drug Abuse Crisis--a comprehensive
action plan to address the national prescription drug abuse epidemic,
FDA issued letters to application holders directing them to submit a
REMS within 120 days and describing the elements that needed to be
included in the REMS (REMS notification letters). The central component
of the Opioid REMS program is an education program for prescribers
(e.g., physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants) and
patients.

B. REMS Prescriber Education

    In the REMS notification letters, FDA provided an outline of the
required prescriber education. The outline specified that the education
must include information on weighing the risks and benefits of opioid
therapy, choosing patients appropriately, managing and monitoring
patients, and counseling patients on the safe use of these drugs. In
addition, the education must include information on how to recognize
evidence of, and the potential for, opioid misuse, abuse, and
addiction. The REMS notification letters stated that although there is
no mandatory requirement that prescribers take the course as a
precondition to dispensing the medication to patients, application
holders will be required to establish goals for the number of
prescribers trained, collect the information about the number of
prescribers who took the courses, and report the information to FDA as
part of periodic required assessments.

C. CE Providers Will Conduct Prescriber Education

    The REMS notification letter expressed FDA's expectation that the
training would be conducted by accredited, independent continuing
education providers. FDA later elaborated on its vision for prescriber
education stating that we expect the CE training to be provided without
cost to the healthcare professionals and that sponsors would offer
unrestricted grants to accredited CE providers to develop CE for the
appropriate prescriber

groups.\2\ We believe having the training provided by CE organizations
will be an incentive and will not create new burdens on prescribers
because most healthcare professionals are routinely engaged in CE
activity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See FDA Opioid REMS Meeting with Industry (May 16, 2011), at
http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/InformationbyDrugClass/ucm258184.htm and Preliminary Responses to Industry Questions About
Opioid REMS at http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/InformationbyDrugClass/ucm258113.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. The Blueprint Will Provide the Basic Outline and Core Messages for
CE

    In response to the April REMS notification letter, application
holders, through an industry working group, submitted an expanded
outline of the potential topics to be covered in the CE, noting that
education incorporating all of the topics in the outline could require
30 or more hours of education. FDA's expectation is that the initial or
basic REMS related CE that should be offered to all prescribers of
long-acting and extended-release opioids should consist of a ``core''
content of about 2 to 3 hours. FDA has reviewed the industry submission
and developed a basic outline and the core messages that FDA believes
should be conveyed to prescribers in this basic educational module.
After it is completed and approved as part of the REMS, the Blueprint
will be posted on FDA's Web site for use by CE providers in developing
CE courses. Although FDA recognizes that additional training modules
could be helpful, FDA's goal is to require basic education for all
prescribers of long-acting and extended-release opioids, and at this
time, FDA does not intend to develop or approve messages as part of the
REMS beyond those approved in the basic core module. Using the
Blueprint on FDA's Web site, CE providers can develop accredited CE in
the manner they choose.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Since early May 2011, FDA has held teleconferences and met
with representatives from the CE accreditor and provider
communities. We have expressed our interest in understanding the
challenges of the CE providers, including the need to be in
compliance with the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical
Education (ACCME) Standards for Commercial Support and the need to
ensure that the content of CE remains beyond the control of
industry. We are confident that the ACCME standards will be met and
ACCME will be satisfied that FDA will control the content of REMS
CE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With this document, FDA is announcing the availability of the
Agency's draft Blueprint for prescriber education and soliciting public
comment. The draft Blueprint is available on the Internet at
www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/DrugSafety/InformationbyDrugClass/UCM277916.pdf. FDA will consider any comments submitted and make
appropriate revisions before approving the Blueprint as a part of the
Opioid REMS.

II. Comments

    Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments on the draft
Blueprint. It is only necessary to send one set of comments. It is no
longer necessary to send two copies of mailed comments. Identify
comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets
Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    Dated: November 1, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-28669 Filed 11-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 151 (Monday, August 6, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38247-38250]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16320]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0805; Product Identifier 2017-NM-051-AD; Amendment
39-19235; AD 2018-07-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; the Boeing Company Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all The
Boeing Company Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83),
and DC-9-87 (MD-87) airplanes, Model MD-88 airplanes, and Model MD-90-
30 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of loss of airspeed
indication due to icing. This AD requires modifying the air data heat
(ADH) system. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: This AD is effective September 10, 2018.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of September 10,
2018.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
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 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
206-231-3195. It is also available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0805.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0805; 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 final rule, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office
(phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Docket 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 Igama, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Section, FAA, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 3960
Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
562-627-5210; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to all The Boeing Company
Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), and DC-9-87
(MD-87) airplanes, Model MD-88 airplanes, and Model MD-90-30 airplanes.
The NPRM published in the Federal Register on August 25, 2017 (82 FR
40505). The NPRM was prompted by a report of loss of airspeed
indication due to icing. The NPRM proposed to require modifying the ADH
system. We are issuing this AD to prevent operation of unheated air
data sensors in icing conditions. Failure to activate the ADH system in
icing conditions could result in irregular airspeed or altitude
indications, which could possibly result in a runway overrun during a
high speed rejected takeoff (RTO) due to failure to rotate before the
end of the runway, or a stall/overspeed during flight.

Comments

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

Support for the NPRM

    Boeing and the Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA)
expressed support for the NPRM.

Request To Allow the Use of Alternative Ground Terminal Locations

    Delta Airlines (DAL) requested that we revise the proposed AD to
allow alternative ground terminal locations for certain wires. DAL
noted that, during prototype testing, it was unable to relocate ground
wire 2EB292B20N or ground wire 1EB292B20N to certain ground termination
points because those points were already full of existing wires. DAL
noted that Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-30A031, dated June 2,
2017, specifies locating ground wires in specific ground termination
points, and that action is required for compliance (RC). DAL suggested
that varied wiring configurations on Model MD-90 airplanes would lead
it to make multiple requests for alternative methods of compliance
(AMOCs), which could require additional out-of-service time for the
affected airplanes. For this reason, DAL requested that we add language
allowing the use of alternative ground terminal locations as specified
in standard wiring practices manual (SWPM) chapter 20 and Boeing
Service Request (SR) concurrence that provide an equivalent level of
safety.
    We disagree with the commenter's request. If an airplane has a
different wiring or ground termination configuration than that
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-30A031, dated June 2,
2017, an operator must request an AMOC in accordance with the
procedures specified in paragraph (j) of this AD. We have not changed
this AD in this regard.

Request To Extend the Compliance Times

    DAL requested that the compliance times specified in paragraphs
(g)(1) and (g)(2) of the proposed AD (within 28 months after the
effective date of this AD and within 27 months after the effective date
of this AD, respectively) be extended by 6 months. DAL noted that the
actions required by this AD would have to be done outside of regularly
scheduled heavy maintenance checks. DAL stated that Boeing is providing
a lead time of 174 days to procure the needed kits. For these reasons,
DAL requested that the compliance time be extended by 6 months for both
Model MD-88 and MD-90 airplanes.
    We disagree with the commenter's request. We confirmed with Boeing
that the lead time for kit procurement will be 75-90 days, with some
components already available, not 174 days as suggested by DAL. If an
operator needs additional time to comply with this AD, they may request
an AMOC in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph (j) of
this AD. We have not changed this AD in this regard.

Changes to Paragraph (i) of This AD

    We have clarified the language of paragraph (i) of this AD.
Paragraph (i) of the proposed AD would have allowed for the operation
of the airplane even if the modified ADH system is inoperable, so long
as the Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) and the operator's Minimum
Equipment List (MEL) have a provision to allow for this inoperability.
The FAA has revised paragraph (i) of this AD to make it clear that, if
there is a provision in the operator's MEL that allows for the modified
ADH system to be inoperable then the operator can operate the airplane
with an inoperable modified ADH system. We have removed the references
to the MMEL because it is unnecessary to reference the MMEL, as
operators are required in 14 CFR part 91 to have an MEL to operate with
inoperable equipment and a provision cannot be in an MEL without first
being part of the MMEL. The intent of the provision has not changed.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this final rule with the change 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 the change will not increase the economic
burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final rule.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-30A132, dated April
28, 2017; and Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-30A031, dated June 2,
2017. This service information describes procedures for modifying the
ADH system so that it activates when the left and right fuel switches
are in the ON position. These documents are distinct since they apply
to different airplane models. 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.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 553 airplanes of U.S. registry. We
estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification, MD-80 Group 1, 84         56 work-hours x $85 per           $4,459          $9,219        $774,396
 airplanes.                              hour = $4,760.
Modification, MD-80 Group 2, 11         57 work-hours x $85 per           11,014          15,859         174,449
 airplanes.                              hour = $4,845.
Modification, MD-80 Group 3, 336        57 work-hours x $85 per            8,589          13,434       4,513,824
 airplanes.                              hour = $4,845.
Modification, MD-80 Group 4, 1          56 work-hours x $85 per            4,479           9,239           9,239
 airplane.                               hour = $4,760.
Modification, MD-80 Group 5, 37         57 work-hours x $85 per           11,034          15,879         587,523
 airplanes.                              hour = $4,845.
Modification, MD-90 Group 1, 84         37 work-hours x $85 per            4,395           7,540         633,360
 airplanes.                              hour = $3,145.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have received no definitive data that would enable us to provide
cost estimates for doing the modification on Model MD-80 Group 6
airplanes.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more

detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to
the Director of the System Oversight Division.

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

    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):

2018-07-04 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-19235; Docket No. FAA-
2017-0805; Product Identifier 2017-NM-051-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective September 10, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model DC-9-81 (MD-81),
DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83), and DC-9-87 (MD-87) airplanes,
Model MD-88 airplanes, and Model MD-90-30 airplanes, certificated in
any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 30, Ice and rain
protection.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of loss of airspeed indication
due to icing. We are issuing this AD to prevent operation of
unheated air data sensors in icing conditions. Failure to activate
the air data heat (ADH) system in icing conditions could result in
irregular airspeed or altitude indications, which could possibly
result in a runway overrun during a high speed rejected takeoff
(RTO) due to failure to rotate before the end of the runway, or a
stall/overspeed during flight.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2)
of this AD: Do all applicable actions identified as ``RC'' (required
for compliance) in, and in accordance with, the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-30A132, dated
April 28, 2017; or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-30A031, dated
June 2, 2017; as applicable; except as required by paragraph (h) of
this AD.
    (1) For Model DC-9-81 (MD-81), DC-9-82 (MD-82), DC-9-83 (MD-83),
DC-9-87 (MD-87), and Model MD-88 airplanes: Within 28 months after
the effective date of this AD.
    (2) For Model MD-90-30 airplanes: Within 27 months after the
effective date of this AD.

(h) Exception to Certain Service Information Specifications

    Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-30A132, dated April 28,
2017, specifies contacting Boeing, and specifies that action as
``RC'' (Required for Compliance): This AD requires using a method
approved in accordance with the procedures specified in paragraph
(j) of this AD.

(i) Minimum Equipment List (MEL)

    In the event that the ADH system as modified by this AD is
inoperable, an airplane may be operated as specified in the
operator's MEL, provided provisions that address the modified ADH
system are included in the MEL.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles 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 (k) of this AD. Information may
be emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (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 Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has been authorized by the
Manager, Los Angeles ACO Branch, 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.
    (4) Except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD: For service
information that contains steps that are labeled as Required for
Compliance (RC), the provisions of paragraphs (j)(4)(i) and
(j)(4)(ii) of this AD apply.
    (i) The steps labeled as RC, including substeps under an RC step
and any figures identified in an RC step, must be done to comply
with the AD. If a step or substep is labeled ``RC Exempt,'' then the
RC requirement is removed from that step or substep. An AMOC is
required for any deviations to RC steps, including substeps and
identified figures.
    (ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be deviated from using accepted
methods in accordance with the operator's maintenance or inspection
program without obtaining approval of an AMOC, provided the RC
steps, including substeps and identified figures, can still be done
as specified, and the airplane can be put back in an airworthy
condition.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Eric Igama,
Aerospace Engineer, Systems and Equipment Section, FAA, Los Angeles
ACO Branch, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137;

phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected].

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD80-30A132, dated April 28,
2017.
    (ii) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-30A031, dated June 2,
2017.
    (3) 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.
    (4) You may view this 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
206-231-3195.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on March 20, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-16320 Filed 8-3-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 141 (Monday, July 23, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 34840]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15704]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC18-123-000.
    Applicants: Ninnescah Wind Energy, LLC, Kingman Wind Energy I, LLC,
Kingman Wind Energy II, LLC, Pratt Wind, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act and Request for Expedited Action of Ninnescah Wind
Energy, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 7/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20180717-5064.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/7/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG18-107-000.
    Applicants: Cypress Creek Fund 11 Tenant, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Cypress Creek Fund 11 Tenant, LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20180717-5112.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/7/18.

    Docket Numbers: EG18-108-000.
    Applicants: Brantley Farm Solar, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Brantley Farm Solar, LLC.
    Filed Date: 7/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20180717-5113.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/7/18.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1498-005.
    Applicants: Rockford Power II, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Refund Reports--Informational
Filing to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 7/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20180716-5135.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/6/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1499-005.
    Applicants: Rockford Power, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Refund Reports--Informational
Filing to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 7/16/18.
    Accession Number: 20180716-5134.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/6/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2026-000.
    Applicants: Wabash Valley Power Association, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendments to Formulary Rate
Tariff to be effective 9/17/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20180717-5038.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/7/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2027-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to Modify
Mitigation Methodology for Locally-Committed Resources to be effective
12/18/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20180717-5040.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/7/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2028-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to OATT, Sch. 12--
Appx A (Dominion) re: b2373 cost allocation to be effective 5/25/2015.
    Filed Date: 7/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20180717-5070.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/7/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2029-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: GIA and Distribution Service
Agmt AltaGas Power Holdings (U.S.) Inc to be effective 7/18/2018.
    Filed Date: 7/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20180717-5085.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/7/18.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2030-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to SPP's Market
Settlements RNU Rounding Process to be effective 5/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 7/17/18.
    Accession Number: 20180717-5118.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/7/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 17, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-15704 Filed 7-20-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 245 (Monday, December 21, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 83073-83074]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28095]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP20-503-000]

Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Availability of the
Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Northern Lights 2021
Expansion Project

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) for the
Northern Lights 2021 Expansion Project (Project), proposed by Northern
Natural Gas Company (Northern) in the above-referenced docket. Northern
requests authorization to construct the Project, which will consist of
(1) an 0.80-mile-long extension of its 24-inch-diameter Willmar D
Branch Line; (2) a 0.63-mile-long 24-inch-diameter Carlton Interconnect
Loop; (3) replacement of the 0.08-mile-long 8-inch-diameter Viking
Interconnect Branch Line with a 12-inch-diameter branch line of the
same length; (4) a new compressor station (Hinckley Compressor
Station); (5) modifications of the Pierz Compressor Station and
Interconnect; and (6) additional above-grade facilities including a
launcher, receiver, and valve setting. The Project facilities would be
in Dakota, Scott, Carlton, Morrison, and Pine counties in Minnesota.
    The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of the
construction and operation of the Northern Lights 2021 Expansion
Project in accordance with the requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). FERC staff concludes that approval of
the proposed Project, with appropriate mitigating measures, would not
constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality
of the human environment.
    The Commission mailed a copy of the Notice of Availability to
federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies;
elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native
American tribes; potentially affected landowners and other interested
individuals and groups; and newspapers and libraries in the project
area. The EA is only available in electronic format. It may be viewed
and downloaded from the FERC's website (www.ferc.gov), on the natural
gas environmental documents page (https://www.ferc.gov/industries-data/natural-gas/environment/environmental-documents). In addition, the EA
may be accessed by using the eLibrary link on the FERC's website. Click
on the eLibrary link (https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/search),
select General Search and enter the docket number in the Docket Number
field, excluding the last three digits (i.e. CP20-503). Be sure you
have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at (866)
208-3676, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The EA is not a decision document. It presents Commission staff's
independent analysis of the environmental issues for the Commission to
consider when addressing the merits of all issues in this proceeding.
Any person wishing to comment on the EA may do so. Your comments should
focus on the EA's disclosure and discussion of potential environmental
effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen
environmental impacts. The more specific your comments, the more useful
they will be. To ensure that the Commission has the opportunity to
consider your comments prior to making its decision on this project, it
is important that we receive your comments in Washington, DC on or
before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on January 14, 2021.
    For your convenience, there are three methods you can use to file
your comments to the Commission. The Commission encourages electronic
filing of comments and has staff available to assist you at (866) 208-
3676 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please carefully follow these
instructions so that your comments are properly recorded.
    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
FERC Online. This is an easy method for submitting brief, text-only
comments on a project;
    (2) You can also file your comments electronically using the
eFiling feature on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov) under the
link to FERC Online. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a
variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission.
New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on
eRegister. You must select the type of filing you are making. If you
are filing a comment on a particular project, please select ``Comment
on a Filing''; or

    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the Commission. Be sure to reference the project docket number (CP20-
503-000) on your letter. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service
must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC
20426. Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    Filing environmental comments will not give you intervenor status,
but you do not need intervenor status to have your comments considered.
Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing or judicial review of
the Commission's decision. At this point in this proceeding, the
timeframe for filing timely intervention requests has expired. Any
person seeking to become a party to the proceeding must file a motion
to intervene out-of-time pursuant to Rule 214(b)(3) and (d) of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.214(b)(3) and
(d)) and show good cause why the time limitation should be waived.
Motions to intervene are more fully described at https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/ferc-online/how-guides.
    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. The eLibrary link
also provides access to the texts of all formal documents issued by the
Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/overview to
register for eSubscription.

    Dated: December 15, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-28095 Filed 12-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 86 (Friday, May 5, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21217-21218]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09111]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP17-218-000]

Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.; Notice of Request Under
Blanket Authorization

    Take notice that on April 21, 2017 Southern Star Central Gas
Pipeline, Inc. (Southern Star), 4700 Highway 56, Owensboro, Kentucky
42301, filed in the above Docket, a prior notice request pursuant to
sections 157.205, 157.208, 157.210, 157.211 and 157.216 of the
Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Southern
Star's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-479-000, for
authorization to construct, relocate, own, and operate a total of 6.76
miles in four non-contiguous segments of 20-inch-diameter Line V, and
subsequently to abandon the equivalent segment in Noble and Logan
Counties, Oklahoma, all as more fully set forth in the application
which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov
using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last
three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Ronnie
C. Hensley, Manager, Regulatory Compliance, Southern Star Central Gas
Pipelines, Inc., 4700 Highway 56, Owensboro, Kentucky 42301, phone
(270) 852-4658, or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Specifically, Southern Star states that proposed replacement will
increase overall integrity and operational reliability of the Line V
pipeline and allow this portion of the pipeline to receive in-line
assessment instruments in the future. Southern Star states that the
alignment of the proposed Line V replacement will be constructed
approximately 25 feet from and parallel to the existing Line V pipeline
except where avoiding interference with the footprint of Lawnview
Cemetery located in Noble County. Southern Star plans to acquire
amended easements from adjacent landowners of the cemetery and route
the replacement pipeline around the cemetery property on the east side
on adjacent properties. The estimated cost of the project is $11.6
million.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    Any person may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant
notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's
Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of
intervention. Any person filing to intervene or the Commission's staff
may, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under
the Natural Gas Act (NGA) (18 CFR 157.205) file a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the
proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day
after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not
withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest,
the instant request shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii)

and the instructions on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under
the ``e-Filing'' link.

    Dated: April 28, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-09111 Filed 5-4-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 1, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 231)]
[Notices]
[Page 72899-72900]
[DOCID:fr01de08-144]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Noise Exposure Map Notice; Receipt of Noise Compatibility Program
and Request for Review; Waterbury-Oxford Airport, Oxford, CT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces its
determination that the noise exposure map for Waterbury-Oxford Airport,
as submitted by the Connecticut Department of Transportation under the
provisions of Title I of the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act of
1979 (Pub. L. 96-193) and 14 CFR Part 150, is in compliance with
applicable requirements. The FAA also announces that it is reviewing a
proposed noise compatibility program that was submitted for Waterbury-
Oxford Airport under Part 150 in conjunction with the noise exposure
map, and that this program will be approved or disapproved on or before
May 5, 2009.

DATES: Effective Date: The effective date of the FAA's determination on
the noise exposure map and of the start of its review of the associated
noise compatibility program is November 6, 2008. The public comment
period ends on January 5, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John C. Silva, Federal Aviation
Administration, New England Region, Airports Division, ANE-600, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803.
    Comments on the proposed noise compatibility program should also be
submitted to the above office.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces that the FAA finds
that the noise exposure map submitted for Waterbury-Oxford Airport is
in compliance with applicable requirements of Part 150, effective
November 6, 2008. Further, FAA is reviewing a proposed noise
compatibility program for that airport which will be approved or
disapproved on or before May 5, 2009. This notice also announces the
availability of this program for public review and comment.
    Under Section 103 of Title I of the Aviation Safety and Noise
Abatement Act of 1979 (hereinafter referred to as ``the Act''), an
airport operator may submit to the FAA a noise exposure map which meets
applicable regulations and which depicts non-compatible land uses as of
the date of submission of such map, a description of projected aircraft
operations, and the ways in which such operations will affect such map.
The Act requires such map to be developed in consultation with
interested and affected parties in the local community, government
agencies, and persons using the airport. An airport operator who has
submitted a noise exposure map that is found by FAA to be in compliance
with the requirements of Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 150,
promulgated pursuant to Title I of the Act, may submit a noise
compatibility program for FAA approval which sets forth the measures
the operator has taken, or proposes, for the introduction of additional
non-compatible uses.
    The Connecticut Department of Transportation submitted to the FAA,
on October 9, 2008, a noise exposure map, descriptions, and other
documentation that were produced during the Airport Noise Compatibility
Planning (Part 150) study at Bradley International Airport from
September 2004 to October 2008. It was requested that the FAA review
this material as the noise exposure map, as described in Section
103(a)(1) of the Act, and that the noise mitigation measures, to be
implemented jointly by the airport and surrounding communities, be
approved as a noise compatibility program under Section 104(b) of the
Act.
    The FAA has completed its review of the noise exposure maps and
related descriptions submitted by Connecticut Department of
Transportation. The specific maps under consideration were Figures 5-7,
(2007 Baseline Noise Contours), 5-8 (2012 Baseline Noise Contours) and
5-9 (2012 NCP Noise Contours), along with the supporting documentation
in Noise Exposure Map and Noise Compatibility Program: Volume 1. The
FAA has determined that the maps for Bradley International Airport are
in compliance with applicable requirements. This determination is
effective on November 6, 2008.
    FAA's determination on an airport operator's noise exposure maps is
limited to a finding that the maps were developed in accordance with
the procedures contained in Appendix A of FAR Part 150. Such
determination does not constitute approval of the applicant's data,
information or plans, or a commitment to approve a noise compatibility
program or to fund the implementation of that program. If questions
arise concerning the precise relationship of specific properties to
noise exposure contours depicted on a noise exposure map submitted
under Section 103 of the Act, it should be noted that the FAA is not
involved in

any way in determining the relative locations of specific properties
with regard to the depicted noise contours, or in interpreting the
noise exposure map to resolve questions concerning, for example, which
properties should be covered by the provisions of Section 107 of the
Act. These functions are inseparable from the ultimate land use control
and planning responsibilities of local government. These local
responsibilities are not changed in any way under Part 150 or through
FAA's review of a noise exposure map. Therefore, the responsibility for
the detailed overlaying of noise exposure contours onto the map
depicting properties on the surface rests exclusively with the airport
operator that submitted the map, or with those public agencies and
planning agencies with which consultation is required under Section 103
of the Act. The FAA has relied on the certification by the airport
operator, under Section 150.21 of FAR Part 150, that the statutorily
required consultation has been accomplished.
    The FAA has formally received the noise compatibility program for
Bradley International Airport, also effective on November 6, 2008.
Preliminary review of the submitted material indicates that it conforms
to the requirements for the submittal of noise compatibility programs,
but that further review will be necessary prior to approval or
disapproval of the program. The formal review period, limited by law to
a maximum of 180 days, will be completed on or before May 5, 2009. The
FAA's detailed evaluation will be conducted under the provisions of 14
CFR Part 150, Section 150.33. The primary considerations in the
evaluation process are whether the proposed measures may reduce the
level of aviation safety, create an undue burden on interstate or
foreign commerce, or be reasonably consistent with obtaining the goal
of reducing existing non-compatible land uses and preventing the
introduction of additional non-compatible land uses.
    Interested persons are invited to comment on the proposed program
with specific reference to these factors. All comments, other than
those properly addressed to local land use authorities, will be
considered by the FAA to the extent practicable. Copies of the noise
exposure map, the FAA's evaluation of the map, and the proposed noise
compatibility program are available for examination at the following
locations:
    Waterbury-Oxford Airport, 300 Christian Street, Oxford, Connecticut
06483.
    Federal Aviation Administration, New England Region, Airports
Division, ANE-600, 16 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
Massachusetts 01803.
    Questions may be directed to the individual named above under the
heading: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on November 6, 2008.
LaVerne F. Reid,
Manager, Airports Division.
 [FR Doc. E8-28030 Filed 11-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P