Site Visit Report

	Surry Nuclear Power Station

5570 Hog Island Road

Surry, VA 23883

January 28, 2008

Background and Objectives

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is in the process of
developing 316(b) cooling water intake structure requirements that
reflect the best technology available (BTA) for minimizing adverse
environmental impact for all existing power plants and manufacturing
facilities. As part of this process, EPA staff is visiting electric
generators and manufacturers to better understand the cooling water
intake structure (CWIS) technologies in use at facilities, including the
site-specific characteristics of each facility and how these affect the
selection and performance of CWIS technologies.  EPA is also visiting
facilities to better understand cooling water use and specific issues or
technologies that can affect 316(b) compliance.  Surry Nuclear Power
Station (Surry) was selected for a site visit due to its use of Ristroph
screens, its large intake flows, and its proximity to the Washington,
D.C. area and other site visit locations.

Facility Description

The Surry Power Station (SPS) is a nuclear power station located on the
James River on Hog Island in Surry County, Virginia.  The site is owned
and operated by Dominion Power.  It has two generating units that were
originally licensed in 1972 and 1973.  Dominion has obtained license
renewals for the generating units through 2032/2033.   The facility
employs approximately 1000 people and is located on approximately 850
acres.

It operates under NPDES Permit number VA0004090.  The current permit was
renewed in January 2007 and expires on January 21, 2012.

Electricity Generation and Transmission

SPS has two 1700 MW nuclear power generating base-load units with a
total annual energy generation of approximately 12,930,000 MWh.  Both
units operate 100% of the time (CUR = 100%) for 465 days in a row.
Every 18 months, the plant has a scheduled outage that typically ranges
from 25-35 days.  SPS alternates which unit is down during the scheduled
outage. The switchyard is also owned and operated by Dominion.

Cooling Water Intake Structure

SPS uses a once-through cooling water system with a shoreline intake at
the end of a ½ mile long intake canal; the facility also has a
discharge canal 2 miles in length.  SPS refers to the intake structure
at the shoreline as the low level intake and the intake structure at the
end of the canal as the high level intake structure.  Cooling water is
withdrawn from the James river through a common low level intake
structure which is oriented parallel to the river with an intake
velocity of 0.8 – 1.2 ft/sec.  The intake orientation is downstream
rather than upstream for purposes of oyster bed protection. The total
design cooling water intake flow is 2,535 MGD.  The river at the low
level intake structure is about 3.7 miles wide and has water depths
ranging from 21 ft to 90 feet in the main channel.  The non-tidal flow
of the James River fluctuates with a high monthly average flow of 39,778
cfs and a low monthly average of 857 cfs.  Water levels at the Surry
CWIS are affected by the tides with a mean low tide water level of EI.
1.0 ft and a high tide level of EI.1.1 ft.  In addition, the salinity of
the James River can vary from summer to winter with the former being
18,000ppm and the latter being near zero.

A trash rack extends across each of the eight intake bays to prevent
debris from entering the intakes.  The trash racks are 18ft wide.  To
increase survival of impinged fish, SPS operates 8 Ristroph screens
located approximately 17 feet downstream of each trash rack.  SPS
originally installed the Ristroph screens in 1975/1976 after trying
diffusers, bubble screens, lights, and sound with little overall
success.  In SPS experience, these technologies are generally not
effective in turbid waters with the saltline movement experienced by the
facility. Mr. Ristroph worked for the plant at the time and designed the
modified screens for this facility.  He subsequently patented them.  The
stainless steel screens are 15 feet wide, extend approximately 15 feet
below the water, and are operated continuously.  They have 3/8 inch
fish-friendly mesh with fiberglass screen baskets on the front (2 inch
deep by 5.5 inches wide). Sprockets are subject to heavy wear, and are
also stainless steel in construction.  While the screens may be operated
at two speeds (5 and 10 ft/sec), SPS has always operated them at 5
ft/sec.  In the event of spring surge of fish, the screens could be
operated at the higher speed. Each screen panel (47 screens) takes
approximately 8.6 minutes to make one rotation at this speed.  The
screens also have a low pressure spray system (24 spray nozzles inside
and 48 spray nozzles outside) to remove any collected fish from the
buckets and convey them to a trough which then conveys them back to the
river approximately 1000 feet downstream of the intake structure and 500
feet from the shore.

	A circulating water pump is located downstream of each screen.  The 8
circulating non-variable speed water pumps (210,000 gpm each) convey the
water to the intake canal.  Water then flows down the approximately 1.7
miles long and 32 feet wide trapezoidal shaped intake canal into a
secondary screenhouse at the plant.  This screenhouse has conventional
traveling water screens.  Biocides (sodium bromide and sodium
hypochlorite) are used at the high level intakes for 2 hours/day.  SPS
also has the capability to shut off a portion of the system to
deoxygenate the water. Water is then conveyed by gravity to the rest of
the station and to the condensers.

The facility does much of the maintenance of the Ristoph screens on
site.  They have a team of 6-8 employees that operate and maintain the
intake structure, screens, etc. as part of their responsibilities.  SPS
rotates out approximately 4 screens per year for maintenance (i.e., each
screen operates continuously for 24 months).  They inspect, clean, and
repair screens as necessary and lubricate and/or replace chains and/or
baskets.  SPS estimated that it costs them approximately $40,000-$50,000
for a total rebuild of a screen.  SPS performs maintenance from October
to March so that all 8 screens are in operation during the spring and
summer.

Water is discharged from the plant through the discharge canal and back
to the James River.  The delta T is approximately 13 degrees F.

Impingement and Entrainment Information

SPS performed impingement studies in the mid 1970s.  They collected two
samples per day, five days a week for four years.  They also collected
24 hour composite samples once per month.  The data shows 94% survival
for all species combined.  SPS published these results in the American
Fisheries Society (AFS) Journal.  These efficacy studies include pre and
post- Ristroph screen data.  Prior to the Ristroph screens, the facility
had fine mesh traveling screens (not modified) and trash racks at the
high level intake structure.  More recently, the Virginia Institute of
Marine Science (VIMS) performed an impingement and entrainment study for
SPS.  Bay anchovies and naked gobies represented the majority of the
impinged species.  SPS has not yet analyzed the data for entrainment
efficacy.  SPS believes its data collected in the 1970s to still be
representative.  The only difference between the 1970s study and the
more recent study is that shellfish were included in the more recent
study.  SPS also noted that the fish population in the river has
remained largely unchanged.

The plant was confident it could meet the impingement requirements of
the now-suspended 2004 316(b) Phase II rulemaking.  Because the rule was
remanded, the facility has not put much thought or study into how they
would have achieved the entrainment requirements.

Cooling Tower Feasibility

Facility representatives noted that the plant’s containment domes are
excavated 6 feet into the ground and that its condensers are
underground.  Facility representatives added that the partially
excavated nuclear domes keep the facility out of the skyline from the
nearby Jamestown area.  They also indicated that water chemistry would
be complicated due to variable salt levels.  Finally, they raised
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) permitting concerns.  The plant
indicated it would review its permit application and respond to EPA with
more information on cooling tower feasibility, as applicable.

Attachments

Attachment A		List of Attendees

Attachment B		Aerial Photos

Attachment C		Site Visit Photos

Attachment A--List of Attendees

Mike Holland, Dominion Generation, Surry Power Station

Barry A. Arber, Dominion Generation, Surry Power Station

Bill Bolin, Dominion Generation, Richmond, VA

Ronal Birckhead, Dominion Generation, Surry Power Station

Paul Shriner, EPA

Jan Matuszko, EPA

Josh Hall, EPA

Erik Helm, EPA

Attachment B—Aerial Photos

Please see DCN 10-6516A accompanying this document.

Attachment C—Site Visit Photos

Please see DCNs 10-6516B-HH accompanying this document.

 PAGE

 PAGE   6


PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION Please read the instructions before completing this form. For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency's Paperwork Clearance Officer. Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW Washington, DC 20503.

1. Agency/ Subagency originating request U. S. EPA/ Office of Enforcement & Compliance Assurance 2. OMB control number b. G None a_ 2 0 6 0  _ 0 0 7 9 __ __ __ __

3. Type of information collection ( check one) a. G New collection b. G Revision of a currently approved collection c. X Extension of a currently approved collection d. G Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired e. G Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired f. G Existing collection in use without an OMB control number 4. Type of review requested ( check one) a. X Regular b. G Emergency  Approval requested by: / / c. G Delegated 5. Small entities Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? G Yes X No For b f, note item A2 of Supporting Statement Instructions 6. Requested expiration date a. X Three years from approval date b. G Other Specify: / /

7. Title NSPS Subpart JJJ  Petroleum Dry Cleaners 8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable) 0997.06 9. Keywords NSPS, petroleum, dry cleaners 10. Abstract Affected facilities are petroleum dry cleaners constructed after the date of proposal. Standards require that sources record and maintain data from the initial performance test of the flow rate for the solvent recovery system. Under the general provisions affected facilities are required to submit a onetime report on the initial performance test..

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. Farms b. P Business or other for profit e. Federal Government c. Not for profit institutions f. State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. G Voluntary b. G Required to obtain or retain benefits c. X Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents 18 b. Total annual responses 93 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically 0 % c. Total annual hours requested 1,483 d. Current OMB inventory 1,483 e. Difference 0 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change 2. Adjustment 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars)

a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs 0 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) 0 c. Total annualized cost requested 0 d. Current OMB inventory 0 e. Difference 0 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change 2. Adjustment 15. Purpose of information collection ( Mark Primary With " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. __ Application for benefits e. __ Program planning or management b. __ Program evaluation f. __ Research c. __ General purpose statistics g. _ P_ Regulatory or compliance d. __ Audit 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting ( check all that apply) a. X Recordkeeping b. Q Third party disclosure c. X Reporting 1. Q On occasion 2. Q Weekly 3. Q Monthly 4. Q Quarterly 5. Q Semi annually 6. Q Annually 7. Q Biannually 8. Q Other ( describe) one time, initial notice 17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

Q Yes X No 18. Agency contact ( person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission) Name: Joyce Chandler Phone: 202 564 7073 OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, 1 certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

( a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

© It reduces burden on small entities;

( d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

( e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

( f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

( g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3): ( I) Why the information is being collected; ( ii) Use of information; ( iii) Burden estimate; ( iv) Nature of response ( voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory); ( v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and ( vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

( h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected ( see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

( I) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and ( j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.

Signature of Program Office Official Elliot J. Gilberg Director, CCSMD Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Joseph Retzer, Director Regulatory Information Division Office of Policy ( OP) Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 5 (Friday, January 8, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 991]
[FR Doc No: 2016-92]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Extension for the Final Environmental Impact Statement
for the Proposed Airport, Angoon, Alaska

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Extension as required by ANILCA title XI.

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

SUMMARY: The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
filed a title XI ANILCA application with the FAA, U.S. Forest Service,
and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on January 9, 2015. ANILCA section
1104(e), states that ``the final environmental impact statement shall
be completed within one year from the date of such filing. Such nine-
month and one-year periods may be extended for good cause by the
Federal agency head assigned lead responsibility for the preparation of
such statement if he determines that additional time is necessary for
such preparation, notifies the applicant in writing of such
determination and publishes notice of such determination, together with
the reasons therefore, in the Federal Register''. Due to complexities
of the project, the FAA has determined that additional time is
necessary to complete the final environmental impact statement.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leslie Grey, AAL-611, Federal Aviation
Administration, Alaskan Region, Airports Division, 222 W. 7th Avenue
Box #14, Anchorage, AK 99513. Ms. Grey may be contacted during business
hours at<PHONE_NUMBER> (telephone) and<PHONE_NUMBER> (fax), or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Additional details regarding the project can be found on the
project Web site at www.angoonairporteis.com.

    Issued in Anchorage, Alaska, on December 23, 2015.
Byron K. Huffman,
Manager, Airports Division, AAL-600.
[FR Doc. 2016-92 Filed 1-7-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 225 (Friday, November 26, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67460-67461]
[FR Doc No: 2021-25812]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0693; FRL-9306-01-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Pesticides Data Call-In (DCI) Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), Pesticides Data Call-In (DCI)
Program (EPA ICR Number 2288.04, OMB Control Number 2070-0174) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through November 30,
2021. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal
Register on March 31, 2021 during a 60-day comment period. This notice
allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller
description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden
and cost to the public. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless
it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 27,
2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments to EPA, referencing docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OPP-2020-0693, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method) or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection
Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the docket without change, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to
be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
    Submit written comments and recommendations to OMB for the proposed
information collection within 30 days of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carolyn Siu, Mission Support Division
(7101M), Office of Program Support, Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (703)
347-0159; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: This ICR covers the information collection activities
associated with the issuance of DCIs under section 3(c)(2)(B) of the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). EPA
regulates the use of pesticides under the authority of two federal
statutes: FIFRA (7.U.S.C. 136 et seq.) and the Federal Food, Drug and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) (21 U.S.C. 346). In general, before manufacturers
can sell pesticides in the United States, EPA must evaluate the
pesticides thoroughly to ensure that they meet federal safety standards
to protect human health and the environment. EPA grants a
``registration'' or license that permits a pesticide's distribution,
sale, and use only after the company meets the scientific and
regulatory requirements.
    In evaluating a pesticide registration application, EPA assesses a
wide variety of potential human health and environmental effects
associated with the use of the product. Applicants, or potential
registrants, must generate or provide the scientific data necessary to
address concerns pertaining to the identity, composition, potential
adverse effects, and environmental fate of each pesticide. The data
allow EPA to evaluate if a pesticide has the potential to cause harmful
effects on certain non-target organisms and endangered species, and on
surface or ground water.
    Through a scientific and public process, EPA specifies the kinds of
data and information necessary to make regulatory judgments about the
risks and benefits of pesticide products under FIFRA sections 3, 4 and
5, as well as the data and information needed to determine the safety
of pesticide chemical residues under FFDCA section 408. The regulations
in 40 CFR part 158 describe the minimum data and information EPA
typically requires in an application for pesticide registration or
amendment; reregistration of a pesticide product; maintenance of a
pesticide registration by means of the DCI process (e.g., as used in
the registration review program); or to establish or maintain a
tolerance or exemption from the requirements of a tolerance for a
pesticide chemical residue. EPA uses the DCIs issued under this ICR to
acquire the data necessary for its statutorily mandated review of a
pesticide's registration, which assess if the continued registration of
a pesticide causes an unreasonable adverse effect on human health or
the environment.
    Form Numbers: EPA Form No. 8570-4, 8574-27, 8570-28, 8570-32, 8579-
34, 8570-35, 8570-36, 8570-37, 6300-3, and 6300-4.
    Respondents/affected entities: Pesticide registrants.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory under FIFRA section
3(c)(2)(B).
    Estimated number of respondents: 122 (total).
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Total estimated burden: 3,227,892 hours (per year). Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $254,539,344 (per year), includes $0
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: Due to an error in past ICRs where annual
totals were misreported as 3-year totals underestimating the total
approved burden hours and costs by a factor of 3. Also, due to a
clerical error, a burden of 58,206 hours was approved rather than the
submitted 625,669 burden hours from the currently approved ICR by OMB.
The Agency has corrected this error and there is an increase of
2,649,183 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with
the ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase is due to an increase
of DCIs issued over the next three years from 663 to 802, that will
require data generation thus raising the average of DCIs issued
annually from 221 to 267. Other factors are the addition of high-test
costs for certain DCIs, and an increase in non-government wage rates.
This is a program adjustment and correction.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2021-25812 Filed 11-24-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 201 (Thursday, October 19, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48614-48615]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22499]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 31158; Amdt. No. 3768]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports. These
regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised
criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace
System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities,
adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These
changes are designed to provide for the safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective October 19, 2017. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of October 19, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:

For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the
affected airport is located;
    3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free
of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center online at nfdc.faa.gov
to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP
copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service
Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedure
Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Procedures
Division, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration,
Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the
appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data
Center (NFDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated
by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20.
The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a
special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register
expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory
text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts
printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP contained on FAA form documents is
unnecessary.
    This amendment provides the affected CFR sections, and specifies
the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective
dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the
procedure and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs as identified in the amendatory language for part 97
of this final rule.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the
transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this
amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP
and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as modified by FDC permanent NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, as modified by FDC
permanent NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the
criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument
Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs and Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific
conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in
this rule have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an
emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to
published aeronautical charts.
    The circumstances that created the need for these SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP amendments require making them effective in less than
30 days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these
SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find
that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are
impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where
applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making these
SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(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);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 22, 2017.
John S. Duncan,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal regulations, part 97, (14 CFR part 97), is amended by
amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and Takeoff Minimums
and ODPs, effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113,
40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:
    By amending: Sec.  97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or
TACAN; Sec.  97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; Sec.
97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; Sec.  97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV;
Sec.  97.31 RADAR SIAPs; Sec.  97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and Sec.  97.35 COPTER
SIAPs, Identified as follows:

* * * Effective Upon Publication

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      AIRAC date           State              City                 Airport          FDC No.      FDC date                      Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9-Nov-17.............  ND             Gwinner.............  Gwinner-Roger Melroe       7/2653      9/11/17  RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Amdt 4.
                                                             Field.
9-Nov-17.............  IN             Indianapolis........  Indy South Greenwood       7/3540      9/11/17  RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Amdt 2.
9-Nov-17.............  GA             Louisville..........  Louisville Muni.....       7/4416      9/18/17  RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Orig.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2017-22499 Filed 10-18-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P